Appeal No. 96-0626
Application 08/187,328
Sernaker, 702 F.2d 989, 995, 217 USPQ 1, 6 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
1239 (Fed. Cir. 1995), citing W. L. Gore & Assocs. v. Garlock,
Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1548, 220 USPQ 303, 309 (Fed. Cir. 1983),
cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
Appellants argue the following issues:
1. Appellants assert that the Examiner has not
established a prima facie case of obviousness in that no
requisite motivation has been demonstrated for combining the
layered structure of Appellants' admitted prior art (or that
of Suyama) with Nakamura to obtain a silicon layer or with
Hayashi to obtain a diamond-like carbon layer. As to Hayashi,
Appellants argue that they have not discovered that diamond-
like carbon has excellent insulating properties or
conductivity, but that it improves MR heads. Further,
Appellants contend that Nakamura teaches away from using
silicon as an insulating layer (other than as a substrate)
since Nakamura uses four insulating layers which are not
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007