Appeal No. 1997-4069 Page 8
Application No. 08/282,913
... a designated exposed integrated circuit die
that is mounted on and electrically connected within
said module and which forms a component in the
electrical system; and
a driver suitable for directing the operation of
the electrical system in which the integrated
circuit die is intended to be used in a manner that
exercises the designated die to facilitate testing
of the designated die during the operation of the
electrical system.
In summary, the claims each recite testing an IC die while the
die is connected to and exercised by the actual electrical
system in which it is to be used.
The examiner fails to show a teaching or suggestion of
the claimed limitations. “Obviousness may not be established
using hindsight or in view of the teachings or suggestions of
the inventor.” Para-Ordnance Mfg. v. SGS Importers Int’l, 73
F.3d 1085, 1087, 37 USPQ2d 1237, 1239 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (citing
W.L. Gore & Assocs., Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540,
1551, 1553, 220 USPQ 303, 311, 312-13 (Fed. Cir. 1983)). “The
mere fact that the prior art may be modified in the manner
suggested by the Examiner does not make the modification
obvious unless the prior art suggested the desirability of the
modification.” In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1266, 23 USPQ2d
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007