Appeal No. 95-2623
Application 08/084,623
Dependent claims 23-26 recite that the spring is
metal, glass, quartz and plastic, respectively. The examiner
notes that Kahn teaches a spring made from plastic. The
examiner asserts that Latorre would have suggested to the
artisan that the spring of Kahn could be made from any of the
claimed materials as a matter of obvious design choice absent
a showing of criticality [answer, page 3]. Appellant argues
that Latorre does not relate to the art of testing
semiconductor devices, however, as we noted above, the
relevant art for these claims is the art of springs in
general. Thus, all arts which teach springs are available for
consideration by the artisan.
Appellant also again argues the question of
criticality as discussed above. For purposes of considering
the obviousness of the invention as recited in claims 23-26,
we again agree with the examiner that a prima facie case of
obviousness has been established. Kahn teaches a plastic
helical spring and also discusses the fact that metal springs
were used in the prior art. Latorre specifically teaches a
quartz spring. A spring, by definition, is simply an elastic
device which has the property of regaining its original shape
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007