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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I, Species I: Figures 1-18, and Sub-species B: Figure 22B, without traverse.
Claim 3 and 6 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention/species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on November 24, 2025.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/25/2024 is being considered by the examiner. A signed IDS is hereby attached.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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, 2, 4, 5, and 7 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "inspecting the surface condition of the recording medium by the thermal resistance sensor" in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim previously sets forth that the thermal resistance sensor performs detecting a surface condition of the recording medium. It is unclear whether “detecting” and “inspecting” represent the same function or whether they are distinct. In the interest of advancing prosecution, the examiner considers “inspecting” as a term that’s interchangeable and equivalent to “detecting”.
Claims 2, 4, 5, and 7 are indefinite by virtue of their respective dependency on claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okada et al. U.S. Patent Number US11341991B1(hereinafter Okada) in view of Shibasaki U.S. Patent Publication Number US20130335842A1(herein after Shibasaki), further in view of Kasiraj et al. U.S. Patent Publication Number US20050069298A1(hereinafter Kasiraj) and futher in view of Watanabe U.S. Patent Publication Number US20220122636A1(hereinafter Watanabe).
Regarding Claim 1, Okada discloses A magnetic disk device comprising: a rotatable disk-shaped recording medium including a plurality of concentric recording tracks (Col. 4 lines 22-28 i.e., recording medium ... rotates the magnetic disk 12, and a plurality of magnetic heads… The HDD 10 ... magnetic heads 16 on arbitrary tracks on the magnetic disk 12.); a magnetic head (Fig. 3 i.e., magnetic head 16; Col. 5 lines. 50-55 i.e., magnetic head 16), comprising a recording element (Fig. 3 i.e., write head 58; Col. 5 lines. 50-55 i.e., a write head (write element) 58) having a first width in a direction intersecting the recording tracks (Fig. 3; Col. 6 lines 14-18 i.e., ... magnetic disk 12 is defined as ...a width direction...), a reproducing element (Fig. 3 i.e., read head 54; Col. 6 lines 14-18 i.e., a read head (read element) 54) having a second width in a direction intersecting the recording tracks (Fig. 3 i.e., read head 54), and a thermal resistance sensor (Fig. 3 i.e., CS; Col. 6 lines 6-13 i.e., The head portion 17 further includes a contact sensor CS. … The contact sensor CS is… a resistance detection type thermal contact sensor...) having a third width in a direction intersecting the recording tracks (Fig. 3 i.e., CS) and detecting a surface condition of the recording medium (Col. 4 lines 35-47 i.e., The head amplifier IC 30 is ... is electrically connected to the magnetic head 16.; Col. 4 lines 47-49 i.e., The head amplifier IC 30 further includes a contact detection circuit 35 that detects a detection signal of a contact sensor (CS)... ); a head actuator that positions the magnetic head on any recording track of the recording medium (Col. 4 lines 26-28 i.e., ...head actuator 18 that moves and positions magnetic heads 16 on arbitrary tracks on the magnetic disk 12); a detection circuit that detects defects on a surface of the recording medium based on a sensor output of the thermal resistance sensor (Col. 4 lines 35-47 i.e., The head amplifier IC 30 is ... is electrically connected to the magnetic head 16.; Col. 4 lines 47-49 i.e., The head amplifier IC 30 further includes a contact detection circuit 35 that detects a detection signal of a contact sensor (CS)... ) except the width of the thermal resistance sensor is larger than the width of the recording element and a controller that, when inspecting the surface condition of the recording medium by the thermal resistance sensor, sets a feed pitch of the magnetic head in a width direction of the recording track to within ½ of the third width of the thermal resistance sensor and three or more recording tracks.
In an analogous art, Shibasaki teaches the width of the thermal resistance sensor is wider than the width of the write head (para. [0095] i.e., ...the width WHDIS of the HDI sensor 123 in the track direction (that is, the HDI sensor width) is more than 10 times as large as the width WRE of the read element 122 in the track direction (that is, the read element width).)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the wider width of the thermal resistance sensor than the read element discloses in Shibasaki into the magnetic head to achieve the claimed invention in order to inspect the defect on the recording media effectively (Shibasaki, para. 95).
However, Okada as modified by Shibasaki fails to explicitly disclose the thermal resistance sensor is wider than the read head.
In an analogous art, Kasiraj teaches the write head is wider than the read head width (para. [0005]...the write head width advantageously can be significantly larger than the track pitch in shingled track writing; whereas the width of the read-back head element can be slightly less than the track pitch... ).
Kasiraj teaches the width of the read-back head element can be slightly less than the track pitch (Fig. 2) and having a wider write head is advantageous (Kasiraj, para. 5). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the wider read head by Kasiraj into the magnetic head in Okada as modified by Shibasaki in order to increase overall recording density (Kasiraj, para. 5 and 21). Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have understood that a wider thermal resistance sensor provides benefits as taught by Shibasaki and Kasiraj and the thermal resistance sensor can simultaneously sense for defects of multiple tracks of the magnetic disk at once by setting the width of the thermal resistance sensor (HR) as being larger (W3>W2,W1).
However, Okada as modified by Shibasaki and Kasiraj fails to explicitly disclose a controller to inspect the surface condition of the recording medium.
In an analogous art, Watanabe teaches a controller (para. [0079] i.e., MPU 14) that, when inspecting the surface condition of the recording medium by the thermal resistance sensor (para. [0046] i.e., The gaps between the head surfaces of the write head 10W and read head 10R and recording surface of the magnetic disk 2 are detected by the gap sensor S. … the gap sensor S is a resistance-type sensor; para. [0052] i.e., the gap sensor S ...the resistance...changes relatively to the temperature. When the temperature rises, the resistance of the gap sensor S becomes higher, and hence, it becomes possible to detect presence/absence of the protruding part 2B by monitoring the resistance value of the gap sensor S.), sets a feed pitch of the magnetic head in a width direction of the recording track to within 1/2 of the third width of the thermal resistance sensor and three or more recording tracks (Fig. 13; para. [0079] i.e. When inspecting the defect of the magnetic disk 2, the MPU 14 moves the slider 301 in units of tracks in sequence, and detects whether or not a defect exists on each track. More specifically, as shown in FIG. 13, the MPU 14 uses the slider 301 to carry out an inspection in sequence from the track n−2, in the order of n−1, n, n+1, and n+2.).
A person of ordinary skill in the art, upon reading the reference, would have recognized the desirability of improved methods of conducting defect inspection. The cross-track movement of the head is inherently characterized by a track-based pitch because, Watanabe teaches to perform defect inspection sequentially from track to track. In other words, reference Watanabe already constrains finite number of inspection knowns to be useful for conducting defects determination.
Therefore, inspecting the surface condition of the recording medium by the thermal resistance sensor, sets a feed pitch of the magnetic head in a width direction of the recording track to within ½ of the third width of the thermal resistance sensor and three or more recording tracks corresponds to choosing one of those finite number of trials in order to balance inspection coverage.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try performing the defects inspection sequentially over the tracks in Watanabe in attempt to provide an improved inspection by thermal resistance sensor, as a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. In turn, it would have been obvious to try such feed pitch settings of the magnetic head with reasonable expectation of predictable solutions.
Regarding Claim 2, Okada as modified by Shibasaki, Kasiraj and Watanabe teaches the magnetic disk device of claim 1 as discussed above. Watanabe further teaches the magnetic disk device wherein
when inspecting the surface condition of the recording medium, the controller drives the head actuator so that the magnetic head is moved (para. [0079] i.e., inspecting the defect of the magnetic disk 2, the MPU 14 moves the slider 301 in units of tracks in sequence, and detects whether or not a defect exists on each track ) within 1/2 of the third width of the thermal resistance sensor and three or more recording tracks in the feed pitch direction for every rotation of the recording medium (Fig. 13; para. [0079] i.e. When inspecting the defect of the magnetic disk 2, the MPU 14 moves the slider 301 in units of tracks in sequence, and detects whether or not a defect exists on each track. More specifically, as shown in FIG. 13, the MPU 14 uses the slider 301 to carry out an inspection in sequence from the track n−2, in the order of n−1, n, n+1, and n+2.).
The motivation of obviousness discussed in the rejection of claim 1 is herein repeated.
Regarding Claim 4, Okada as modified by Shibasaki, Kasiraj and Watanabe teaches the magnetic disk device of claim 1 as discussed above. Okada further discloses the magnetic disk device wherein the recording element (Fig. 3 i.e., write head 58) and the reproducing element (Fig. 3 i.e., read head 54) are arranged side by side at intervals in a first direction intersecting the recording tracks (Fig. 3; Col. 6 lines 40-44 i.e., The write head 58...generates a recording magnetic field in a direction perpendicular to the surface of the magnetic disk 12...), and the thermal resistance sensor (Fig. 3 i.e, CS) is arranged side by side with the recording element (Fig. 3 i.e., write head 58) and the reproducing element (Fig. 3 i.e., read head 54) in the first direction and is located between the recording element and the reproducing element (Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 5, Okada as modified by Shibasaki, Kasiraj and Watanabe teaches the magnetic disk device of claim 4 as discussed above. Shibasaki further teaches the magnetic disk wherein the recording element, the reproducing element, and the thermal resistance sensor each have their centers in the width direction located on a central axis extending in the first direction (Fig. 1, "write element 121", "HDI sensor 123", and "read element 122"; para. [0028] i.e., The HDI sensor 123 (more specifically, the MR element of the HDI sensor 123) has a width (hereinafter referred to as the HDI sensor width) ... in the radial direction of the disk 11).
In Fig. 1 "write element 121", "HDI sensor 123", and "read element 122" are all aligned at the same position in the cross track direction, and this line corresponds to the central axis extending in the first direction.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the arrangement of the recording element, the reproducing element, and the thermal resistance sensor in reference Shibasaki into the magnetic head in order to determine the defects effectively (Shibasaki, para. 95).
Regarding Claim 7, Okada as modified by Shibasaki, Kasiraj and Watanabe teaches the magnetic disk device of claim 1 as discussed above. Okada further discloses the magnetic disk device wherein the magnetic head comprises a thermal actuator (Col. 5 lines 63-67 i.e., The head portion 17 includes a first thermal actuator...).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHELLE J KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-5571. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 7:30am-4:30/5pm.
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.
/MICHELLE J. KIM/Examiner, Art Unit 2688
/Daniell L Negron/Supervisory Patent Examiner
December 12, 2025