Appeal No. 1997-3120
Application No. 08/219,853
The references relied upon by the examiner as evidence of
obviousness are:
DesMarais, Jr. (DesMarais) 4,327,124 Apr. 27, 1982
Cassat 4,756,756 Jul. 12, 1988
All of the appealed claims are rejected under the first
paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112 as being based upon a disclosure
which would not enable one having ordinary skill in the art to
practice the here claimed invention. In the paragraph
bridging pages 5 and 6 of the Answer, the examiner expresses
his non-enablement position as follows:
In particular, at page 2, lines 28-29, it is
stated that nickel particles having an
average diameter of 15 microns are to be used
in the process. But at page 3, lines 7-11,
describing Fig. 3(A), the specification
provides that the distance between "pad 8"
and the top of "thick portion 3" is
3 microns, even though the nickel particles,
previously described as having an average
diameter of 15 microns, are caught
therebetween. One of ordinary skill in the
art is not taught how to capture the
15 micron average diameter nickel particles
between the pad and thick portion spaced by
only 3 microns. Undue experimentation would
be required.
Additionally, claims 61-65 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Cassat in view of DesMarais.
The examiner concludes that, based on the disclosure of
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007