Appeal No. 98-0592
Application 08/463,168
enclosure so that said shock sensitive sensor is viewable
through said window.” The shock sensitive sensor changes from
one state to another when the disk drive has been subjected to
a shock of a predetermined amount.
Elliot discloses a disk drive 10 having a base 50, cover
52, disk 12, actuator 30, and transducer 28. The examiner
finds that Elliott’s disk drive does not include any window on
the cover or base for viewing inside an enclosure or any shock
sensitive sensor capable of changing from one state to another
and attached to either the cover or the base, which is
viewable through a window on the cover or base. (Answer at 4).
However, the examiner is of the view that the deficiencies of
Elliott are made up from the teachings of Rubey when they are
applied in combination with the teachings of Elliott.
Central to this appeal is an issue of claim
interpretation. As the Federal Circuit has stated, "the name
of the game is the claim." In re Hiniker Co., 150 F.3d 1367,
1369, 47 USPQ2d 1523, 1529 (Fed. Cir. 1998). The examiner and
the appellant apparently disagree as to whether claim 13
requires the shock sensitive sensor to be located within an
enclosure formed by the cover and the base and encompassing or
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007