Appeal No. 97-0745
Application No. 08/355,886
Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir.
1993) and In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443,
1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992)), which is established when the teachings
of the prior art itself would appear to have suggested the
claimed subject matter to one of ordinary skill in the art (see
In re Bell, 991 F.2d 781, 783, 26 USPQ2d 1529, 1531 (Fed. Cir.
1993) and In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1051, 189 USPQ 143, 147
(CCPA 1976)).
This invention relates to a metal stencil mask for screen
printing a conductive paste upon a substrate during the
fabrication of microelectronic devices. According to the
appellants, these masks typically comprise a stencil portion,
which is placed in contact with the substrate, and a mesh portion
which provides support for the stencil portion. The depth of the
voids in the stencil portion of the mask determine the thickness
of the lines of conductive paste deposited upon the substrate.
Known masks often deposit excessive amounts of paste upon the
substrate. In the case where the substrate is an unfired ceramic
sheet, this can result in problems such as substrate instability,
the result of which can be substrate “opens” as a result of “via”
columns being misaligned. The objective of the appellants’
invention is to overcome these problems, and this is accomplished
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007