DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings were received on 12 February 2026. These drawings are accepted.
The drawings, however, are again objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. For instance, “nano-bumpers with surfaces extending proximally rearward away from said ABS and passing over inductive magnetic coil elements,” as set forth in claim 4, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s) (emphasis added). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) and/or an amendment to the claim(s) in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(c) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
a. In line 5 of the replaced first paragraph on page 12, “magnetic recording media 1140 (shown clearly in FIG. 5)” should be changed to --magnetic recording media 1140 (shown clearly in FIG. 7)-- in order to be consistent with the remainder of the disclosure.
b. In line 16 of claim 1, “nano- bumper” should be changed to
--nano-bumper-- for consistency and clarity.
c. In line 2 of claim 2, and lines 4-5 of claim 5, each instance of “said double-peaked DFH bulge” should be changed to --said double-peak DFH bulge-- in order to more clearly refer back to that set forth in line 14 of independent claim 1.
d. In line 1 in each of claims 10-13 and 16, “The slider mounted HAMR read/write head” should be changed to --The slider-mounted HAMR read/write head-- in order to more clearly refer back to that set forth in line 1 of base claim 9.
e. In lines 2-3 of claim 11, “a touchdown (TD) an ABS of said slider” should be changed to --a touchdown (TD) of an ABS of said slider-- for better clarity.
f. In line 1 in each of claims 14 and 15, “The slider mounted HAMR read/write head” should be changed to --The slider-mounted HAMR read/write head-- for consistency and clarity.
g. In lines 2-3 of claim 14, “from 108 micro-meters^2 to 122 micro-meters^2” should be corrected to read --from 108 µm2 to 122 µm2-- in order to improve clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-11 and 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
a. Claims 14 and 15 are indefinite because they depend either directly (claim 14) or indirectly (claim 15) on canceled “claim 12.” See line 1 of claim 14.
b. Many elements in the claims are indefinite because they lack clear and/or positive antecedent basis including “said reader shield” (line 13 of claim 1), “said disk” (line 2 of claim 7), “said HDIs” (lines 3 and 5 of claim 10), “the HDI/TD wear conditions” (lines 3-4 of claim 13), “said TD area” (line 2 of claim 14), and “said DFH bulge” (line 2 of claim 15).
c. In lines 2 and 3-4 of claim 9, line 2 of claim 10, and lines 2-3 of claim 11, it is indefinite as to whether each instance of “said slider” refers to that set forth in line 4 of independent claim 1, or that set forth in line 2 of base claim 9.
d. In line 6 (twice) of claim 18, it is indefinite as to whether each instance of “the slider” refers to that set forth in line 4 of independent claim 1, or that set forth in line 3 of claim 18.
d. Claims 2-6, 8, 16 and 17 inherit the indefiniteness associated with their respective base claims and stand rejected as well.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-11 and 13-18 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Applicant’s arguments/remarks filed 12 February 2026 with respect to the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been found to be persuasive and the claims are allowable for the reasoning provided therein.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12 February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to the objection to the drawings under 37 CFR 1.83(a), the applicant argues that “Nano-bumpers are shown in Figs. 4C and 4D as described on page 9 of the Specification.” This argument, however, is not found to be persuasive as “nano-bumpers with surfaces extending proximally rearward away from said ABS and passing over inductive magnetic coil elements,” as set forth in claim 4, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s) (emphasis added).
With respect to the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), the applicant argues that “Proper antecedent basis has been provided and indefiniteness resolved for each of the elements pointed out by the Examiner.” This argument, however, is not found to be persuasive as many elements still lack proper antecedent basis as detailed in paragraph 6b, supra.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Craig A. Renner whose telephone number is (571) 272-7580. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 AM - 7:30 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven Lim can be reached at (571) 270-1210. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CRAIG A. RENNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2688
Prosecution Insights