Appeal No. 1998-2562
Application No. 08/567,403
denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
With respect to representative, independent claim 13, the
examiner has indicated how he reads this claim on the
disclosure of Bennin [answer, pages 4-5]. Appellants argue
that the entire gimbal interconnect structure of Bennin is a
conductive material, whereas the claimed invention has a
flexure structure which
includes a nonconductive dielectric film with an embedded
conductor structure which extends only to the gimbal
structure. Appellants also argue that the claimed tongue of
the claimed gimbal is implemented out of this nonconductive
dielectric film and that Bennin does not show such a gimbal
structure [brief, pages 4-5]. The examiner responds that the
invention as broadly recited in independent claim 13 is fully
met by the disclosure of Bennin [answer, pages 7-9].
We agree with the position argued by appellants.
Although we agree with the examiner that Bennin does disclose
a nonconductive dielectric film having a conductor structure
embedded therein as recited in claim 13, we agree with
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007