Appeal No. 1998-3053
Application 08/677,755
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 13-18 stand rejected as follows: under the
judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double
patenting over
claim 1 of Melton ‘453 in view of Tulman, and under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Melton ‘341 in view of
Tulman.
OPINION
We reverse the aforementioned rejections.
Obviousness-type double patenting rejection
Claim 1 of Melton ‘453 recites that the assembly is
heated to a temperature greater than the melting temperature
of a solder composition formed of first and second metal
constituents, but less than the melting temperature of each of
these constituents, such that the first and second metals
cooperate to form an interfacial liquid phase that wets a
metal plate composed of the first metal and a metal bump
composed of the second metal.
Tulman discloses a solder composition which typically is
-3-3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007