Appeal No. 2004-0653
Application No. 09/872,053
due to the clearly different sizes of such drives and connectors,
different pin pitch requirements, and different pin arrangements,
absent hindsight, one of ordinary skill in the art would not have
considered a modification like that urged by the examiner.
Moreover, we find nothing in the prior art relied upon by the
examiner or in the knowledge attributable to those of ordinary
skill in the art which would have provided any teaching,
suggestion, or motivation to devise a 2.5 inch form factor disc
drive for use in computing environments already configured for
3.5 inch form factor disc drives. In that regard, we share
appellants' view in the reply brief that the examiner's reasoning
found in the paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3 of the answer is
fraught with speculation and conjecture, and inaccurately
characterizes any teaching to be derived from Furay concerning
different connectors for a 2.5 inch disc drive and a 3.0 inch
disc drive.
For the above reasons, we will not sustain the examiner's
rejection of claims 1, 13, 18 and 22 through 27 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Furay in view of Baxter.
77
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007