Appeal No. 1998-3059
Application 08/554,288
applied current (answer, page 4). Schwartz, however, states
that “[t]he actual steps in employing in [sic] immersion
electroplating by the use of the new electrolytes of this
invention are those generally used in the art” (col. 6, lines
35-37). This disclosure and the disclosure that “[t]his
invention relates to immersion electrolytic plating, and more
particularly to electrolytes therefor” (col. 1, lines 22-23),
indicate that Schwartz discloses immersion electrolytic
plating electrolytes.
The second point is that the examiner presented
calculations (advisory action mailed March 17, 1997, paper no.
13) which show that certain reductions of copper, nickel and
tin have a positive reduction potential. According to the
examiner, see id., these positive potentials, together with
Knaster’s teaching (col. 1, lines 15-25) that an electric
current is not required for a displacement of iron by copper
using a solution which, like Schwartz’s solution (col. 2,
lines 40-43), contains an acid, indicate that Schwartz
discloses an electroless process. Even if the examiner’s
calculations are correct, the examiner’s argument based
thereon is not persuasive because the examiner has not
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007