Appeal No. 96-1507
Application 08/168,185
same paragraph beginning at the bottom on page 6 of the brief
are performed during a process of assembling the claimed
packaged device, both resins remain a part of the completed,
claimed structure. Although there appears to be ample
evidence among the two references relied upon by the examiner
of a thermosetting resin of the type set forth at the end of
claim 1 on appeal, there are no teachings or suggestions or
reasonable inferences that the artisan would have derived from
the applied references and, in the absence of any persuasive
reasoning advanced by the examiner in the answer, it would not
have been obvious to the artisan to have formed the separately
recited “at least two spaced apart masses of a temporary
bonding resin” as recited in independent claim 1 on appeal on
the basis of the evidence provided. Therefore, the rejection
of claims 1 and 8 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 must be reversed.
REVERSED
JAMES D. THOMAS )
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007