Appeal No. 95-1186
Application No. 08/051,797
radiating patch 4 and feeding patch 3 are on different levels,
vertically disposed from each other.
The examiner argues, at page 14 of the principal answer,
that the cross section of Zaghloul’s Figures 1a and 1b is
“deemed to show ‘the surface of a common substrate’,” and that
a “substrate is not merely a single printed circuit board, but
is the material on which ‘circuits’ are formed,” concluding
therefrom that circuits 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Zaghloul are formed
on the surface of a substrate. While we might be persuaded
that the recitation of a “substrate” does not preclude an
element of several layers and that the cross section of
several layers in Figures 1a and 1b of Zaghloul may be
interpreted as a “substrate,” so that the patches are on a
“common” substrate, claim 17 requires the array of groups of
patches to be disposed on the “surface” of a common substrate.
It appears clear to us that by reciting a “surface” of a
common substrate in the claim, the array of groups of patches
must lie in a single plane which is a surface of a substrate
no matter how many layers that substrate comprises. The
groups of patches in Zaghloul do not lie in a single plane, or
surface of a substrate. Accordingly, the rejection of claims
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007