Appeal No. 2002-1240
Application 09/247,550
We note that the Examiner has relied on Iida for teaching an
overlapping range. See pages 4 through 6 of the Examiner’s
answer. We thereby will not sustain this rejection for the same
reasons as we set forth above.
Claim 5 is another independent claim with dependent claims
10 and 15. We note that claim 5 recites “said gap has a
normalized value which is independent of a diameter of said
magnetic discs and which is in a range from about 1/150 to
1/890.” We note that the Examiner relies on Iida teaching the
same overlapping range as discussed above to obtain these
normalized value. See page 7 of the final action as well as
pages 5 and 6 of the Examiner’s answer. Therefore, we will not
sustain the rejection of claims 5, 10 and 15 for the same reasons
as above.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007