Appeal No. 2001-1094
Application 09/237,578
commence review of the pertinent evidence and arguments of
Appellant and Examiner.
Upon review, we fail to find that the Examiner has provided
us with objective evidence to support why one of ordinary skill
in the art would have combined Horikawa with Flechsig. All of
the independent claims include the limitation of a piezoelectric
transducer secured to the surrounding sidewall surface and
projecting outwardly. See Appeal Brief, Page 17, lines 14-15 and
Page 19, lines 5-6 and Page 20, lines 1-2. We find Flechsig
teaches a piezoelectric sensor sandwiched within a slider. See
Flechsig, Figure 2, and column 4, lines 5-9. However, we find
that Flechsig fails to provide any suggestion to move the
piezoelectric sensor to be secured to the surrounding sidewall
surface.
We find that Horikawa teaches a composite magnetic head
portion 20 attached to the front surface of the head slider 13.
See Horikawa Figure 1(B) and column 4, lines 21-23. We also find
that the composite magnetic head portion 20 is used for detecting
surface roughness of a magnetic recording medium, a magnetic disk
11. See Horikawa, column 3, lines 45-53. However, we find this
teaching of placing a roughness sensor on the front surface of
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007