Ex Parte Lauffer et al - Page 2




            Appeal No. 2002-0942                                                          Page 2              
            Application No. 09/553,715                                                                        


                                               BACKGROUND                                                     
                   The appellants' invention relates to a printed circuit board with embedded                 
            decoupling capacitance and method for producing same (specification, p. 1).  A copy of            
            the claims under appeal is set forth in the appendix to the appellants' brief.                    


                   Claims 1, 3 and 5 to 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being                       
            unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 5,640,761 to DiStefano et al. (DiStefano).                      


                   Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and              
            the appellants regarding the above-noted rejection, we make reference to the answer               
            (Paper No. 12, mailed April 4, 2002) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support             
            of the rejection, and to the brief (Paper No. 11, filed March 22, 2002) and reply brief           
            (Paper No. 13, filed April 26, 2002) for the appellants' arguments thereagainst.                  


                                                  OPINION                                                     
                   In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to            
            the appellants' specification and claims, to the applied prior art reference, and to the          
            respective positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner.  Upon evaluation of          
            all the evidence before us, it is our conclusion that the evidence adduced by the                 
            examiner is insufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness with respect to           








Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007