Appeal No. 95-2483
Application 08/098,008
scope of the meaning that may be reasonably attributed to these
two broad terms. Again, the top of page 2 of appellants=
specification as filed indicates that the prior art recognizes
that such bond leads may be Aformed on@ or otherwise Adeposited
on@ the top of existing coating materials.
Claims 40 and 44 set forth the same subject matter but
respectively depending from independent claims 1 and 15 on
appeal. The showing of the bond leads in Figure 2 is
Asubstantially@ horizontal and they are normally in the art to
the extent broadly recited in these claims. The extent of the
vertical rise of the bond leads is dependent upon conventional
fabrication techniques, which obviously could be variable within
the art or the manufacturing of any individual device different
from another type of device in integrated circuit form. Bond
wires with high loops are disfavored in the art. Specification,
prior art discussion at page 3, lines 12 to 19.
Finally, the subject matter of claim 41 is rejected for the
same reason that we have rejected its corresponding claim 6 at
page 5 of our earlier opinion. Lai plainly teaches that the
binder material may be epoxy or polyamide, both of which are
broadly considered to be plastics.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007