Appeal No. 1998-1658
Application 08/343,876
Issue (4): Claims 7 and 14
Shimizu '178, Shimizu '645, and Yokoyama
The contents of Yokoyama are discussed under Issue (2).
The Examiner concludes that it would have been obvious to
modify the recording medium of Shimizu '178 with the coating
taught by Yokoyama (EA10-11):
The rationale is as follows: One of ordinary skill in
the art would have been motivated to coat a magnetic
recording medium with a binder having a dispersion of
magnetic fine particles comprising Fe as taught by Yokoyama
et al to offer a configurational magnetic anisotropy in the
magnetic recording medium; see Yokoyama et al, column 3,
lines 60-68.
Appellants argue that Yokoyama does not suggest a magnetic
head having a high saturation magnetic flux density material
provided only on one side of the gap portion, or a media having
substantially uniaxial oblique magnetic anisotropy with respect
to a recording surface of the medium (Br11).
Yokoyama is not relied on for the head construction, so the
fact that it does not teach a one-side MIG head is irrelevant.
We find no suggestion to modify Shimizu '178 in view of
Yokoyama as stated by the Examiner. Shimizu '178 provides a
magnetic material with substantially uniaxial oblique magnetic
anisotropy by oblique-incidence vacuum evaporation of a cobalt
alloy. There is no suggestion to modify this step by using Fe in
a binder, which is a completely different kind of fabrication
step that is inconsistent with the vacuum evaporation step of
- 16 -
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007