Appeal No.1999-2236
Application No. 08/408,036
resistance characteristics between a magnetic head and a recording medium), the
suggestion, by Suzuki, that protrusions with a high rate of curvature on the surface of a
recording medium improves performance would reasonably have led the artisan to
increase the rate of curvature on the protrusions in Nakamura without regard to the
specifics of the method used by Suzuki to obtain the “relatively large rate of curvature.”
With regard to appellants’ argument that the references do not suggest the
claimed average radius of curvature, we agree with appellants that the references do
not explicitly disclose the specifically claimed average radius of curvature “of at least
about 2-:m. However, it is the examiner’s position that the average radius of curvature
recited in the claims is “at least about 2-:m” or, as in claim 16, “no less than about
1.5-:m” and that since no upper limit is recited, Suzuki’s teaching of a “large rate of
curvature” is seen to meet the limitation. We agree that the claimed average radius of
curvature, having no upper limitation, may be met by any teaching of a radius of
curvature 1.5 :m or greater. We also agree that since Suzuki recites a “large rate of
curvature,” artisans would have found its specific value to be a result effective variable.
Appellants argue that even if the examiner has established a prima facie case of
obviousness, such case is negated by the disclosure, at pages 7-8 of the instant
specification, that shows unexpectedly good results have been achieved using
appellants’ dimensions. We might agree with appellants if there was evidence showing
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007