Appeal No. 2001-1690
Application 08/859,407
package and performing the undercutting step just prior to
attaching a lid to the package. See specification, page 6,
line 29 - page 7, line 5. In other words, the present invention
avoids the possibility of damaging particles entering the
undercut wells during transfer of the devices from the tape to
the final package by performing the transfer to the final package
prior to the undercutting step. See Specification, page 7, lines
5-11.
DISCUSSION
A prior art reference anticipates a claim when the
reference discloses every feature of the claimed invention either
explicitly or inherently. See Hazani v. U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n,
126 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d 1358, 1361 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
The principal argument advanced by appellant in
traversing the examiner’s rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102 is
that Mignardi does not teach the claimed step of “mounting the
separated partially fabricated devices on a package.” See Reply
Brief, Paper No. 14, received November 17, 2000, pages 2-3. The
examiner appears to take the position that Mignardi’s disclosure
of mounting a partially fabricated device onto adhesive tape and
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007