Appeal No. 2006-0467
Application No. 10/063,004
small spot sizes using evanescent coupling and the
resulting high numerical aperture, thereby providing
increased spatial density and data storage capacity”
(col. 2, lines 12-16).
Based on this finding, the examiner concludes (id.) that:
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art at the time of the appellants’
invention to modify the device of Feuerherd et al. to
utilize air-incident recording meeting appellants’
[claimed device and] claimed method ...
In so concluding, the examiner fails to explain why one of
ordinary skill in the art would have utilized components useful
for designing a storage device for substrate-incident recording,
such as those used by Feuerherd, in making the air-incident
recording storage device of the type discussed in Sandstrom. On
this record, the examiner does not provide any rationale why one
of ordinary skill in the art would have selected and then
modified the substrate-incident recording storage device of
Feuerherd, when the storage device of Sandstrom is said to be
advantageous for air-incident recording. Accordingly, we reverse
the examiner’s § 103 rejections.
REMAND
We observe that Sandstrom teaches “rewritable optical data
storage media including magneto-optic disks useful in near-field,
air-incident recording applications.” See column 1, lines 5-7.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007