Appeal 2007-1055
Application 10/831,012
comparison between values within the claimed ranges for separation
distance and thickness and values that would have been used by one of
ordinary skill in the art in devices of the type disclosed by Fathy. Hence,
Appellants have not established with objective evidence that the claimed
distance between adjacent transmission lines and thickness for the thermally
conductive element are critical parameters with respect to providing
unexpected results.
We note that figure 6 of Fathy also depicts a thermally conductive
element (606) and an array of electrical transmission lines (616) separated
from substrate (602) by a dielectric material (604). Appellants maintain that
element (610) of Fathy is not described as being thermally conductive.
Appellants submit that Fathy merely teaches that element (606) is a ground
plane. However, Gotro evidences that it was known in the art that such
power ground planes are used to dissipate heat from electronic components
(see ¶ 0009). Hence, we agree with the Examiner that element (606) of
Fathy qualifies as a thermally conductive element that dissipates heat to at
least the unspecified degree claimed.
Appellants also contend that transmission lines (616) of Fathy “are
embedded in the layer 604, and so are not separated from layer 602 by a
dielectric layer as required by the claims” (Reply Br. 8, third para.).
However, although transmission lines (616) are embedded in dielectric
layer (604), the fact remains that lines (616) are separated from substrate
(602) by the dielectric (604) into which they are embedded.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013