Appeal 2007-1281
Application 10/104,386
1 termination pads 430 are placed on the same side as the trace connections
2 440, and therefore not ‘provided on the opposite side of the slider compared
3 to a conventional slider.’” (Reply Br. 2) (emphasis in original).
4 Zeng discloses a slider being attached to a gimbaled region of the
5 flexure (FF 5-6) using an adhesive (FF 7). Zeng further discloses that two
6 adhesive layers could be used, rather than a single layer that would
7 ordinarily attach the slider to the flexure (FF 8). It is our view that Zeng’s
8 adhesive layer 530 can be interpreted as a “bonding area.”
9 In other words, Zeng discloses a bonding area of the slider that
10 includes adhesive layers 530. As illustrated in Zeng’s Fig. 14, the adhesive
11 layer 530 is provided both on the opposite side of trace connections and on
12 the same side of trace connections. Given that the claim language does not
13 limit claim 1 to only providing the bonding area on the opposite side…,
14 Zeng reads on providing a bonding area of the slider on the opposite side of
15 trace connections for the traces (in addition to other areas).
16
17 NEW GROUND OF REJECTION
18 In addition to affirming the Examiner’s rejection of claim 1, this
19 decision, pursuant to our authority under 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b), contains a
20 new ground of rejection.
21 Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as being
22 misdescriptive, and therefore vague and indefinite. Claims are considered to
23 be definite, as required by the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112, when
24 they define the metes and bounds of a claimed invention with a reasonable
25 degree of precision and particularity. See In re Venezia, 530 F.2d 956, 958
26 (CCPA 1976).
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013