Interference 104,530
Jurgenson v. Dunfield
located on the rigid region of the load beam (Paper 86 at 10-
11).
27. Dunfield does not dispute that the microactuator
located on the rigid region of the load beam is a material
limitation.
28. The parties agree that there are generally three
regions that comprise a load beam: (1) the rigid region; (2)
the mounting region; and (3) the spring region (Paper 84 at 6
and Paper 86 at 6).
The Panels Order
29. Oral argument on preliminary motions was held April
20, 2001.
30. On May 14, 2001, an order was issued, inviting the
parties to provide comments regarding two issues (Paper 83).
31. The first issue is whether Dunfield’s claims 1, 2,
9, and 11 from its parent application (08/438,091) are to the
same or substantially the same subject matter as Dunfield’s
involved claims 40 and 41.
32. The second issue is whether a decision on the
remaining preliminary motions is necessary if it is
determined that Dunfield’s claims 40 and 41 are barred under
35 U.S.C. § 135(b).
- 10 -
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007