Appeal No. 2001-1305
Application 08/872,782
of Kametani and Voss. We note that the Examiner relies on Bindra
for a teaching of one ceramic-containing dielectric layer and a
one outermost protective impermeable fluoropolymer layer devoid
of ceramic material deposed on and covering said at least one
ceramic containing dielectric layer. See page 5 of the
Examiner’s answer. We further note that claim 5 recites
wherein said outermost and opposing outermost
impermeable fluoropolymer barrier layers are devoid of
ceramic components, and said first and second intermediate
dielectric-layers comprise ceramic containing
fluoropolymers, and
wherein said outermost and opposing outermost
impermeable fluoropolymer barrier layers are impermeable to
process chemicals encountered during fabrication of said
packaging platform and permit metallized ceramic line
processes without degradation of said packaging platform.
Similarly, Appellants claim 10 recites
a laminate having opposite outer surfaces and including
at least one ceramic containing dielectric layer disposed
and covering one of said opposite outer surfaces, said
surface further comprising fine line circuitry and at least
one outer most impermeable protective fluoropolymer barrier
layer devoid of ceramic material wherein said outer most
impermeable barrier layer covers said at least one ceramic-
containing dielectric layer and is impermeable to process
chemicals encountered during fabrication of said circuitized
structure and permits metallized ceramic line processes
without degradation of said circuitized structure.
Therefore, for the same reasons as we discussed above, we find
that Bindra fails to teach these limitations.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007