Appeal 2007-0683
Application 10/121,772
requirements of independent claims 1, 11, and 19. We begin by noting that
the data head supporting structure 15 and the servo head supporting structure
16 in Nakanishi are each made of three components, i.e., actuator arm
assemblies (12a’,12a’-1 and 12b’,12b’-1), flexure assemblies (leaf springs
13a and 13b), and core sliders 14a and 14b. (Nakanishi, col. 4, ll. 37-57).
As with Appellants’ claimed invention, the objective of Nakanishi is to
attenuate the resonance response in the disc drive by varying the vibration
oscillation characteristics of the head supporting structures 15 and 16.
(Nakanishi, Figure 9).
In implementing this objective, Nakanishi describes varying the
structural characteristics of the individual components of the head
supporting structure in three separate embodiments. In the first
embodiment, illustrated in Nakanishi’s Figures 6 and 7, the width, thickness,
or material composition of the flexure assemblies (leaf springs 13a and13b)
is slightly varied from each other. (Nakanishi, col. 5, ll. 41-50 and col. 7, ll.
38-51). Since the differing oscillation characteristics of the head supporting
structures 15 and 16 in this embodiment are attributed solely to the
variations in the flexure assemblies, it is reasonable to conclude that the
other head supporting structure components, i.e., the actuator arms 12a and
12b and the core sliders 14a and 14b are at least substantially structurally
identical.
In the next embodiment (Nakanishi, Figures 11A and 11B and col. 7,
ll. 38-51), the differing head structure oscillation characteristics are
implemented by slightly varying the thickness of the cores sliders 14a and
14b from each other. That the structure of the other two head components,
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013