Appeal No. 1999-2839
Application 08/824,716
Appellants’ Brief and Examiner’s Answer for the respective1 2
details thereof.
OPINION
With full consideration being given the subject matter on
appeal, the Examiner’s rejection and the arguments of Appellants
and Examiner, for the reasons stated infra, we will reverse the
Examiner’s rejection of claims 1, 2 and 4-7 under 35 U.S.C. §
102 as being anticipated by Gallagher.
In Argument, Appellants assert that the claims on appeal
specifically require that two insulating layers exist between
the first and second magnetic conductive layers. Brief at page
5. Referencing Gallagher’s Fig. 4D, reproduced below,
Appellants argue that Gallagher only discloses and fairly
suggests one insulating layer between the magnetic metal layers
10 and 30 and that is layer 20. Brief at page 5.
1Appellants filed a Main Brief On Appeal (“Brief”) on
June 14, 1999. Appellants subsequently filed a Reply Brief on
September 8, 1999.
2The Examiner, in response to Appellants’ Brief, mailed
an Examiner's Answer on July 2, 1999.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007