Appeal No. 1997-1427
Application No. 08/483,777
Webb 5,447,600
Sept. 5, 1995
(filed Mar. 21, 1994)
Claims 8 through 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Webb in view of Hornbeck.
Reference is made to the brief and the answer for the
respective positions of the appellant and the examiner.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the entire record before us,
and we will sustain the obviousness rejection as to claims 8
through 10 and 14, and we will reverse the obviousness
rejection as to claims 11 through 13.
Appellant acknowledges (Brief, pages 4 and 5) that Webb
discloses a micromechanical device in which the deflectable
beam 20 and the address electrodes 16 are at different biases,
and in which the deflectable beam 20 and the landing
electrodes 14 are at the same bias. According to appellant,
the pad film 26 only acts as an insulator between the landing
electrodes 14 and the deflectable beam 20 because “[t]he pad
film is etched away from the address electrodes [16].”
We agree with appellant that the pad film 26 has been
removed from the address electrodes 16 in the first embodiment
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007