Appeal No. 2005-0234
Application No. 09/901,550
with no indication as to which parts. Thus, Wiech fails to
disclose the recited preventing a flowable material from flowing
from a bonding channel onto the frame and conductor tracks.
Second, appellants contend (Brief, page 8) that with regard
to the claimed parting agent, "Wiech, Jr., explicitly teach[es]
that reference sign 24 denotes a conductive material, namely a
metal line formed in the groove. . . . [T]he conductive material
24 forms conductors rather than a parting agent." Appellants
continue (Brief, page 8) that "Wiech, Jr. also does not suggest
or provide any hint to use a groove filled with a parting agent
for repelling a flowable material." We agree.
As stated by appellants, element 24 in Wiech is a conductor,
with no teaching or suggestion that it repels a flowable
material. Although the examiner states that element 24 "is
capable of performing the intended use," the examiner supplies no
evidence of such. In fact, the examiner states that any material
would satisfy the limitation because appellants did not list
particular materials in the specification. However, appellants
have defined "parting agent" (specification, page 7) as a
material which repels a flowable material, and appellants have
recited in the claims that the parting agent must repel the
flowable material. Therefore, for a material to satisfy the
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007