Appeal No. 1997-0252
Application 08/200,820
The key feature of claims 7 and 22 argued by appellants is that Clabes does not teach
or suggest a tip portion coated with a hard-magnetic material effective to maintain the
magnetization direction of the probe constant and parallel to the given magnetization
direction of the sample. Appellants argue that Clabes’ use of a carbon matrix with nickel,
cobalt or iron particles results in a probe made of soft-magnetic materials rather than the
claimed hard-magnetic materials [brief, page 13]. Although the examiner adds to the
confusion by referring to nickel, iron and cobalt as hard-magnetic materials, there is,
nevertheless, a suggestion in Clabes that true hard-magnetic materials should be used to
coat the tip of the probe.
It should be noted that Clabes is not directed only to magnetic force microscopes, but
is generically directed to atomic force microscopes. Thus, it is clear that the
characteristics of the Clabes probe would be governed by the type of microscope being
used and the type of forces being monitored. We agree with the examiner that the abstract
in Clabes clearly states that the tip of the probe can be made “with hard or soft magnetic
properties at the distal end of the needle structure.” The artisan would have understood
this disclosure to suggest that the probe tip in certain circumstances should be coated with
a hard-magnetic material. The very nature of a hard-magnetic material is that it will
maintain the magnetization direction constant in the presence of a magnetic field.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007