Appeal No. 1996-3814 Page 6
Application No. 08/348,835
predetermined grooves filled with magnetized magnetic
substance as called for by the appealed method claim (answer,
page 3). According to the examiner (answer, page 3):
Marechal et al. teach filling predetermined grooves
with a magnetic substance for an information
recording element (col. 5, l. 62 to col. 6, l. 63).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill
in this art at the time of the invention to fill
predetermined grooves with a magnetic substance to
form the magnetic patterns of Henrich. One of
ordinary skill in this art would have been motivated
to make this substitution to the magnetic scale of
Henrich because of the teaching of Marechal et al.
that filling the magnetic substance in predetermined
grooves protects the magnetic substance from ambient
conditions.
The § 103 rejection is premised upon the examiner's
position that the claimed magnetized particle filled grooves
of the substrate are not patentably distinguishable from
Marechal's tracks (supplemental answer, page 3 and answer,
pages 3, 5, and 6). Appellants contend, in effect, that the
teachings of Marechal relied upon by the examiner would, at
most, suggest the use of the side-by-side magnetized
particle/non-magnetized particle tracks of Marechal in
layer(s) deposited on the substrate of Henrich, not the
provision of a substrate with predetermined grooves formed
therein and the filling of said grooves with magnetized
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007