Appeal No. 2006-0513
Application No. 09/741,684
contacts 70 on the slider 16 are described as “pads” while the
suspension contacts are referred to as “solder-wettable regions.”
After reviewing the disclosure of Ainslie, however, we are
in agreement with the Examiner (Answer, page 7) that the lead
terminations 47 in Ainslie would necessarily be considered to be
metal bonding pads since they provide electrical connection with
the slider bonding pads. The fact that Ainslie may not use the
word “pads” in describing the suspension contacts is immaterial
especially in view of the fact that Appellant has provided no
disclosure of any particular structure of a contact pad that
would provide any basis for the claim interpretation asserted by
Appellants. We would further point out that it is well settled
that, even if a reference fails to explicitly spell out every
detail of a claimed invention, such a reference would anticipate
a claim if it discloses the claimed invention “such that a
skilled artisan could take its teachings in combination with his
own knowledge of the particular art and be in possession of the
invention.” In re Graves, 69 F.3d 1147, 1152, 36 USPQ2d 1697,
1701 (Fed. Cir. 1995), quoting from In re LeGrice, 301 F.2d 929,
936, 133 USPQ 365, 372 (CCPA 1962).
Lastly, we also sustain the Examiner’s 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
rejection, based on either Albrecht or Ainslie, of dependent
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007