Appeal No.1998-2486
Application No. 08/751,375
teaching or suggestion by Morehouse that the jacket, together with the disk it protects
has an exterior dimension that exceeds a selected form factor in an uncompressed state
but conforms to the selected form factor in a compressed state. Figure 3 of Morehouse
shows the disk drive with the resilient material therearound being inserted into a computer
housing. The shape of this part of the computer housing would be the “selected form
factor.” While Morehouse provides the resilient material around the disk drive as a shock
absorber in case the component is dropped, there is no indication that Morehouse
employs the resilient material in such a way as to compress in order to conform to the form
factor. If this inherently occurs, the teaching of Morehouse would be applicable against the
claims under 35 U.S.C. § § 102/103. However, we find no such inherent compression of
Morehouse’s resilient material when inserted into the computer housing. In fact,
Morehouse discloses, at column 3, lines 40-54, that the “respective heights of jacket 10
and fence 30 are essentially equal.” Therefore, there would appear to be no compression
of the resilient jacket when the disk drive is placed in the computer housing. Further,
Morehouse discloses, in the cited portion, that a space is left between external surfaces of
the drive 20 and the opposing surfaces of fence 30, computer housing 31 and the cover.
The thickness of the resilient jacket fills that space but there is no indication that the jacket
is compressed. In fact, since Morehouse discloses that the result is that the drive 20 is
“loosely” but securely held in
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007