Appeal No. 1998-0538
Application 08/424,634
also left with a deficiency of the claim requiring two
projection means which are not independently or separately
taught or suggested in the showings in Figures 4-8 of Nagase.
Although page 2 of the reply brief brings out that the
terms "slider" and "carriage" are used somewhat loosely in the
art, we agree with the appellant's view that the examiner has
gone way beyond a reasonable view from an artisan's
perspective in applying the art. The appellant's admitted
prior art, his own contribution in the art, and the
terminology utilized in Nagase from the translation we have of
this reference consistently use the questioned terms that have
been misapplied by the examiner.
The examiner's reliance on Kakizaki to show that it was
old in the art to use adhesives to join a magnetic head core
to a carriage or slider is cumulative because the middle of
page 6 of the translation indicates that the slider 28 in
Figure 2 of Nagase is joined on one side of the magnetic head
core section 21 by applying an adhesive thereto. Moreover,
the appellant's prior art Figures 1-5 indicate that it was
well-known in art to have used an adhesive for the claimed
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007