Appeal No. 1997-2850 Page 5
Application No. 08/417,505
a second securing means as set forth in claim 19.” In order to
supply the deficiency, the examiner relies on Narita. It is
the examiner’s contention that Narita discloses, inter alia, a
magnetic head device “having a first securing means (2) for
securing the magnetic head support (10) only to the housing
(3), and a second securing means (20) for securing the housing
(3) to the head disc (4) independent of said first securing
means (2) and without contacting said head support as recited
in claim 19 (figure 3b)” [answer-page 5]. We disagree.
A review of Narita’s Figure 3b shows a magnetic head 5 and
a rotary cylinder 4 wherein support plate 10 supports the head
5 and is attached, through fixture plate 3, to the rotary
cylinder 4 by way of securing means 2. We can agree with the
examiner that Narita discloses a first securing means for
securing a magnetic head support only to a housing but screw 20
is clearly not a “second securing means,” as claimed, because
screw 20 in Narita is merely an adjustment screw used to
pivotally move the supporting plate 10 and definitely does not
secure a housing to a head disc. In fact, the adjusting screw
20 fails to secure anything. Thus, Narita does not provide for
the admitted deficiencies of Sugizaki.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007