Appeal No. 2006-2457
Application No. 10/358,831
embodiment, the suspension and data head are swept laterally over the storage
media by the interaction of magnetic fields generated in the actuator component
and a magnet. The spring member, however, biases the suspension to a neutral
position due to expansion and contraction of the spring member.
Representative claim 1 is reproduced as follows:
1. An actuation mechanism, comprising:
an anchor fixedly attached to a structure;
a spring member having a first end coupled to the anchor;
a suspension coupled to a second end of the spring member, the
suspension supporting a device above a surface, the suspension being biased by
the spring member toward a first position; and
an actuator component coupled to the suspension, and configured to
apply an actuation force to the suspension to move the suspension laterally
relative to the surface.
The examiner does not rely on any references.1
The following rejection is on appeal before us:
Claims 1-4, 8, 10, 20-24, and 30-35 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
first paragraph as failing to comply with the enablement requirement.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the examiner, we make
reference to the briefs and the answer for the respective details thereof.
1 Although the examiner did not rely upon any prior art throughout prosecution, we note that the
expansive scope and breadth of at least independent claims 1 and 20 (calling for an actuator and
actuation mechanism respectively) is not limited to the disclosed environment (storage media)
and encompasses a variety of mechanical and electro-mechanical arts. See MPEP § 904.01(c).
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007