Appeal No. 97-2035
Application 08/161,234
We sustain the rejection of claims 1, 2, 6, 9 and 10
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Horiuchi in
view of Abo.
Our affirmance of any prior art rejection is based solely
on the arguments made by the appellants in their briefs.
Arguments which could have been raised but which were not
raised are not before us, are not at issue, and are considered
waived.
The rejection of claims 1-4, 6, 9-13 and 15
over Kume, Shiroishi, or Tsuchiya, in view of Abo
The examiner finds that each of Kume, Shiroishi, and
Tsuchiya discloses conductive coatings formed on their
respective slider except in the vicinity of the magnetic
transducers. (Answer at 3). The examiner further finds that
conductive disks are old and well known. (Answer at 3). These
findings are not disputed by the applicants. The applicants
disagree with the examiner’s conclusion that it would have
been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art “to
discharge the built up electrical charge on the slider through
connecting the slider to the disk.” However, for reasons
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007