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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/11/2025 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 § 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.
Applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome this rejection because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. When an English language translation of a non-English language foreign application is required, the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216.
Claim(s) 1-7, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YAMADA U.S. Patent Publication Number US 20230154489 A1 (hereinafter YAMADA) in view of Inoue et al. U.S. Patent Publication Number US20140368954A1(hereinafter Inoue).
Regarding Claim 1, YAMADA discloses A disk drive suspension (Fig. 3 i.e., suspension 10 ) comprising: a load beam (Fig. 3 i.e., load beam 22; para. [0055] i.e., The flexure 30 is fixed to ... the load beam 22 ); and a flexure(Fig. 3 i.e., flexure 30), wherein the flexure includes: a metal base (Fig. 3 i.e., metal base 40; para. [0057] i.e., The flexure 30 comprises a metal base 40...); a slider arrangement portion on which a slider is arranged; and a circuit portion electrically connected to the slider (para. [0059] i.e., ...the wiring portion 50 is electrically connected to the element of the slider 11 via a terminal 51... ), the slider arrangement portion (Fig. 13 i.e., flexure 30) includes: an aperture portion (Fig. 13 i.e., 47) formed in a position on which the slider is arranged (Fig. 9 i.e., slider 11; para. [0070] i.e., slider 11) and open in a thickness direction of the metal base (Fig. 13 ; para. [0166] i.e.,thickness direction Z); a resin member filing the aperture portion (Fig. 13 i.e., 81 and 61; para. [0072] i.e., The base insulating layer 61 and the cover insulating layer 81 are formed of ... resin material...); a conductor portion embedded in the resin member in a part of the circuit portion (Fig. 13 i.e., conductor layer 71; para. [0016] i.e., The flexure further comprises a connection portion, and the conductor layer may include a plurality of lines arranged in a direction orthogonal to a direction of extension of the wiring portion, and the connection. portion. may be electrically connected to at least one of the plurality of lines); a slider support portion (Fig. 13, the upper portion of the cover insulating layer 81), which is formed on a first surface of a thickness direction of the resin member (Fig. 13, the upper portion of the cover insulating layer 81) and on which the slider is arranged; and an abutting portion formed on a second surface of the thickness direction of the resin member (Fig. 13 i.e., 63; para. [0074] i.e., ...the surface 63 in the thickness direction Z is located in the same plane as the surfaces 43... ) except the slider is arranged at the aperture portion of the flexure and a dimple portion of the load beam contacts a flexure.
In an analogous art, Inoue teaches a flexure is disposed between a dimple and a slider (Fig. 9 i.e., slider 11, dimple 100, and conductors 41; para. [0070] i.e., slider 11). Inoue further teaches contacting a protrusion portion of a dimple portion of the load beam (Fig. 9; para. [0070]; i.e., A dimple 100 is formed on the load beam 21. The dimple 100 is an example of a supporting protrusion, and has a convex surface projecting toward the gimbal portion 30 of the flexure 22...).
YAMADA teaches that a flexure of a disk drive suspension includes a load beam, a metal base,
and a flexure provided along the metal base. However, YAMADA fails to explicitly disclose a
gimbal portion including a flexure disposed near the slider, a dimple is formed on the load beam, and a
configuration in which a top of a convex surface of the dimple contacts the flexure portion. Inoue
teaches a slider is disposed on a flexure and a dimple formed on a load beam that contacts a portion of the flexure, as shown in Fig. 9 ( flexure 22, dimple 100 and slider 11). All of the component parts are known in the reference YAMADA and the reference Inoue. The only difference is the combination of known elements into a single device by mounting the elements on a flexure.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the flexure disclosed in YAMADA with the slider arrangement disclosed in Inoue. YAMADA provides a detailed teaching of a flexure structure and functional benefits, while Inoue teaches a disk drive suspension in which a flexure and a slider are used together. Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, combining these teaching would merely involve incorporating the known flexure of YAMADA into the slider arrangement of Inoue to achieve the predictable results.
Regarding Claim 2, YAMADA as modified by Inoue teaches the suspension of claim 1 as discussed above. YAMADA further teaches the suspension wherein the resin member includes: a base resin layer formed inside the aperture portion (Fig. 13 i.e., 61) ; and an embedding resin embedding the conductor portion with overlapping the base resin layer (Fig. 13 i.e., 81; para. [0072] i.e., The base insulating layer 61 and the cover insulating layer 81 are formed of ... resin material..).
Regarding Claim 3, YAMADA as modified by Inoue teaches the suspension of claim 1 as discussed above but fails to teach an auxiliary member contacting the protrusion portion is provided on the abutting portion. Inoue further teaches the suspension wherein an auxiliary member contacting the protrusion portion is provided on the abutting portion (Fig. 9 i.e., hinge portion 93 and dimple 100; para. [0070] i.e., The dimple 100 is an example of a supporting protrusion, and has a convex surface projecting toward the gimbal portion 30 of the flexure 22. As the top of the convex surface (distal end of the dimple 100) contacts the hinge portion 93... ).
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 hinge portion of Inoue into the disk drive suspension of YAMADA in order to provide stable slider support(Inoue, para. 70).
Regarding Claim 4, YAMADA as modified by Inoue teaches the suspension of claim 1 as discussed above. YAMADA further teaches the suspension, wherein the resin member (Fig. 13 i.e., 61; para. [0090] i.e.,The thickness T61 of the base insulating layer 61 is...6 μm. ; para. [0091] i.e.,The thickness T81 of the cover insulating layer 81 is … in a range from 2 to 10 μm. The thickness T81 of the cover insulating layer 81 is, for example, 2 μm.) is thinner than the metal base (Fig. 13 i.e., 40(41A and 41B); para. [0090] i.e., The thickness T41 of the first portions 41A and 41B is, for example, in a range from 11 to 50 μm.).
Regarding Claim 5, YAMADA as modified by Inoue teaches the suspension of claim 1 as discussed above. YAMADA further teaches the suspension, wherein the resin member includes:
a base resin layer formed inside the aperture portion (Fig. 13 i.e., 61; para. [0072] i.e., The base insulating layer 61 ... are formed of ... resin material...); an embedding resin embedding the conductor portion with overlapping a surface of the base resin layer (Fig. 13 i.e., 81; para. [0072] i.e., The base insulating layer 61 and the cover insulating layer 81 are formed of... resin material ... ); and
a foundation resin overlapping an opposite surface of the base resin layer (Fig. 13 i.e., support layer 92; para. [0146] i.e., The support layer 92 is formed of...resin material... ).
Regarding Claim 6, YAMADA as modified by Inoue teaches the suspension of claim 1 as discussed above. YAMADA further teaches the suspension wherein the resin member is composed of an embedding resin filling the aperture portion and embedding the conductor portion (Fig. 13 i.e., 61 and 81; An embedding resin filing corresponds to the base insulating layer 61 and the cover insulating layer 81 that embed the conductor layer 71 and fill the aperture portion.).
Regarding Claim 7, YAMADA as modified by Inoue teaches the suspension of claim 1 as discussed above. YAMADA further teaches the suspension wherein the resin member includes: the embedding resin filling the aperture portion and embedding the conductor portion (Fig. 13 i.e., 61 and 81; The embedding resin filing corresponds to the base insulating layer 61 and the cover insulating layer 81 that embed the conductor layer 71 and fill the aperture portion. ); and a foundation resin overlapping the embedding resin (Fig. 13 i.e., support layer 92; para. [0146] i.e., The support layer 92 is formed of...resin material…; para. [0149] i.e., the support layer 92 overlaps with the wiring portion 50; The wiring portion 50 includes the embedding resin portion.).
Regarding Claim 12, YAMADA as modified by Inoue teaches the suspension of claim 1 as discussed above. YAMADA further teaches the suspension further comprising: a ground conductor electrically connecting the metal base and the conductor portion (Fig. 15 left 93; para. [0160] i.e.,The connection portion 93 can be used to ground the conductor layer 71 to the metal base 40... ).
Claim(s) 8 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YAMADA in view of Inoue as applied to claims 1-7, and 12 above, and further in view of Maruyama et al. U.S. Patent Publication Number US20050063097A1(hereinafter Maruyama).
PNG
media_image1.png
272
427
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 8, YAMADA as modified by Inoue teaches the suspension of claim 2 as discussed above but fails to teach the base resin layer of the resin member and the conductor portion.
In an analogous art, Maruyama teaches the suspension, wherein the base resin layer of the resin member includes: a first portion (See annotated Fig. 9A, a first portion); and a second portion thinner than the first portion (See annotated Fig. 9A, a second portion; T2 is thinner than the T1.), and the conductor portion includes: a first conductor provided on the first portion (See annotated Fig. 9A i.e., 4-1 and 4-2; para. [0089] i.e., 4-1 and 4-2 show write wirings; para. [0089] i.e. , ...symbols T1 and T2 show a film thickness of polyimide resin functioning as an insulating layer positioned under the write wiring path, and a film thickness of polyimide resin functioning as an insulating layer positioned under the read wiring path. A relationship between these film thicknesses is given as T1>T2. ); and a second conductor provided on the second portion (See annotated Fig. 9A i.e., 4-3 and 4-4).
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 different resin thickness disclosed in Maruyama into the disk drive suspension in order to improve a packaging density of electric writing (Maruyama, para. 89).
Regarding Claim 11, YAMADA as modified by Inoue and Maruyama teaches the suspension of claim 8 as discussed above. YAMADA further teaches the suspension further comprising: a connection conductor electrically connecting the first conductor and the second conductor (Fig. 15, right 93; para. [0154] i.e., the flexure 30 further comprises the connection portion 93. The connection portion 93 is formed of, for example, a metallic material such as copper.).
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YAMADA in view of Inoue and further in view of Maruyama as applied to claims 8 and 11 above, and further in view of Kikuchi et al. U.S. Patent Publication Number US20220189505A1(hereinafter Kikuchi).
Regarding Claim 9, YAMADA as modified by Inoue and Maruyama teaches the suspension of claim 8 as discussed above but fails to teach a part of the first conductor is exposed to the first surface of the resin member.
In an analogous art, Kikuchi teaches the suspension, wherein a part of the first conductor is exposed to the first surface of the resin member (Fig. 10 i.e., 44 c; para. [0066] i.e., ...a cover insulating layer 44 d is removed from a thin portion 60 of a second bridge portion 47 d. An exposed conductive layer 44 c,...).
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 thin portion of the conductive layer of Kikuchi into the disk drive suspension in order to improve the strokes without having to change the characteristics or size of the drive element(Kikuchi, para. 60, 61, and 68).
Regarding Claim 10, YAMADA as modified by Inoue and Maruyama teaches the suspension of claim 8 as discussed above but fails to teach a part of the second conductor is exposed to the second surface of the resin member.
Kikuchi teaches the suspension, wherein a part of the second conductor is exposed to the second surface of the resin member (Fig. 10 i.e., 44 c; para. [0066] i.e., ...a cover insulating layer 44 d is removed from a thin portion 60 of a second bridge portion 47 d. An exposed conductive layer 44 c,...).
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 thin portion of the conductive layer of Kikuchi into the disk drive suspension in order to improve the strokes without having to change the characteristics or size of the drive element(Kikuchi, para. 60, 61, and 68).
Claim(s) 13 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YAMADA in view of Inoue as applied to claims 1-7, and 12 above, and further in view of YAMADA U.S. Patent Publication Number US20230267956A1 (hereinafter ‘956 patent).
Regarding Claim 13, YAMADA as modified by Inoue teaches the suspension of claim 1 as discussed above but fails to teach a pedestal member is provided on the slider support portion, and the slider is provided on the slider support portion with the pedestal member sandwiched between the slider and the slider support portion.
In an analogous art, ‘956 patent teaches the suspension, wherein a pedestal member (Fig. 11 i.e., 90) is provided on the slider support portion (Fig. 11, upper portion of a base insulating layer 60), and the slider (Fig. 11, i.e., slider 11) is provided on the slider support portion with the pedestal member sandwiched between the slider and the slider support portion (Fig. 11 i.e., 11, upper portion of 60, 91, and 90 ; para. [0075] i.e., The pillows 90 each include a surface 91 on which the slider 11 is disposed. The slider 11 is placed on the surfaces 91 of pillows 90...).
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 pillows between the slider and the cover insulation layer disclosed in ‘956 patent into the disk drive suspension in order to maintain the height of the mounting slider (‘956 patent, para. 73).
Regarding Claim 14, YAMADA as modified by Inoue teaches the suspension of claim 1 as discussed above but fails to teach a pedestal member integrally formed with the resin member is provided on the resin member, and the slider is provided on the slider support portion with the pedestal member sandwiched between the slider and the slider support portion.
‘956 patent teaches the suspension, wherein a pedestal member integrally formed with the resin member is provided on the resin member (Fig. 5 i.e., 80; para. [0059] i.e., cover insulation layer 80 are each formed... resin material…; para. [0074] i.e., the pillows 90 are formed to be integrated with the cover insulation layer 80), and the slider is provided on the slider support portion with the pedestal member sandwiched between the slider and the slider support portion (Fig. 5 i.e., 11, upper portion of 80, 91, and 90 ; para. [0075] i.e., The pillows 90 each include a surface 91 on which the slider 11 is disposed. The slider 11 is placed on the surfaces 91 of pillows 90...).
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 pillows between the slider and the cover insulation layer disclosed in ‘956 patent into the disk drive suspension in order to maintain the height of the mounting slider (‘956 patent, para. 73).
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
/STEVEN LIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2688