Appeal No. 2001-1448
Application No. 09/121,036
coming in contact with the package body. From such teachings,
the examiner concludes that it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art "to manufacture a surface mount with
leads that extend, cove [sic, cover] and come into contact with
the package body to form a unified connection around the
assembly" (final rejection, pages 2-3).
Like appellant, and for the reasons set forth on pages 5-11
of the brief and in the reply brief, we find that it is only
through the use of impermissible hindsight that the examiner
could conclude that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art at the time of appellant's invention to combine
the teachings of Song and Kikuchi in the manner proposed. While
the examiner has set forth the correct test on page 7 of the
answer for determining whether a reference is analogous prior
art, the examiner has not applied that test to Kikuchi, but
instead has again merely indicated what purported teachings of
that reference the examiner is relying upon. As appellant has
noted, the detection element disclosed in Kikuchi for measuring
physical properties (e.g., flow amount or flow rate) of fluids
(col. 1, lines 7-11) is not a chip package like that addressed by
appellant and does not appear to be reasonably pertinent to the
55
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007