Appeal No. 2000-0314
Application No. 08/944,192
record reflects an advantage or unobvious difference between
the claimed product and the prior art product, then the
product-by-process rationale for rejecting the claim must be
withdrawn. In re Marosi, 710 F.2d 799, 803, 218 USPQ 289,
292-93 (Fed. Cir. 1983). The admitted prior art
(specification, page 1, line 23 through page 2, line 1) and
Tsukada (column 1, lines 13 through 16 and 59 through 62)
provide evidence of differences between vias formed by three
different processes. Vias formed by mechanical drilling are
larger than vias formed by photolithographic techniques, and
vias formed by the latter technique are larger than vias
formed by a laser. A decrease in via size results in a
corresponding increase in wiring density of the printed
circuit board. An additional advantage of the laser technique
for forming vias is that a thicker dielectric can be used in
the printed circuit board. In view of the noted advantages of
laser formed vias over photolithographically formed vias, the
product-by-process reasoning advanced by the examiner can not
stand. Thus, the
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection of claim 15 is reversed.
In the 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims 1 through
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007