Appeal No. 96-1841
Application 08/101,324
layer remote from the electrically conducting layer. In the
Final Rejection, the examiner concluded that, with respect
to the order of layers, it would have been obvious to
rearrange the layers of Smith in a particular sequence
"since it is [sic, was] well within the purview of a skilled
artisan and absent an unobvious result" (FR4). Appellant
does not provide any argument why this statement is
erroneous. In the Examiner's Answer, the examiner states
that one of ordinary skill in the art "would have realized
that as long as the hard layer is enclosed by non-magnetic
layers and as long as the MR layer is contacting the
electrical layer the arrangement with respect to the
substrate need not be in a specific order" (EA6 and EA9).
We agree with the examiner that one of ordinary skill
in the art had sufficient skill to reorder the sequence of
layers, e.g., for manufacturing reasons. It would have been
more persuasive to us if the examiner had cited a reference.
However, appellant does not contest the examiner's statement
that rearrangement is within the knowledge and skill of one
in the art of MR sensors. It may be that the examiner's
statement is not contested because of the teachings of
- 9 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007