Appeal 2006-3363
Application 10/873,363
PRINCIPLES OF LAW
“Substantial evidence ‘means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind
might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.’” In re Jolley 308 F.3d 1317,
1320, 64 USPQ2d 1901, 1903 (Fed. Cir. (2002)) (citing Consol. Edison Co. v
NLRB, 305 U.S. 197, 229 (1938)). “[T]he possibility of drawing two inconsistent
conclusions from the evidence” will not render a decision unsupported by
substantial evidence. Id., (citing Consolo. v. Fed. Mar. Comm’n, 383 U.S. 607,
620 (1966)).
ANALYSIS
Appellants’ arguments have not persuaded us of error in the Examiner’s
rejection. Initially, we note that the Appellants’ arguments on pages 4 through 6 of
the Brief and 2 through 4 of the Reply Brief are directed to the drawings of Tehrani
being inconclusive of the facts found by the Examiner. We note that the standard
of review is whether there is substantial evidence of record (evidence that a
reasonable mind will accept as adequate). This standard will permit a finding to be
supported by the evidence even if inconsistent conclusions can be drawn from the
evidence. See In re Jolley, supra.
Tehrani teaches that the first layer of dielectric cap 45 provides a barrier
which seals the GMR element. This layer in conjunction with layer 32 below seals
the GMR element, thus the layer of cap 45 covers the sides of GMR element.
Facts 6 and 7. In the embodiment where the vias 47 and 50 are etched separately,
vias 50 can extend beyond the edges of the GMR as the etching with the process
that can damage GMR stops above the barrier layer. Fact 10. We note, that
stopping at this level means that the etching is stopped above the GMR element
and above dielectric system 32. In the embodiment where the vias 47 and 50 are
etched simultaneously, the etching stops at the etch stop layer which is formed on
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013