Appeal No. 96-0515
Application 08/169,081
14 and the etch[ed] channel wafer 16 are cured to
complete the bonding of the filter thereto.
Filter 14 may be 1-100 microns thick, may be electroformed,
and must be a plateable material that is corrosion resistant
to ink, diceable, and robust enough to handle, such as nickel
(col. 5, lines 1-11). In addition to filtering out
contamination from the ink and ink supply system, the filter
prevents dirt and other debris from entering the relatively
large inlets during printhead assembly (col. 5, lines 53-56).
The filter alternatively may be a woven, mesh type filter or,
preferably, a membrane filter produced, for example, by
electroforming or other photolithographically defineable
processes (col. 7, lines 33-36). The examiner argues that
it would have been obvious . . . to incorporate a
flexible porous member having an intermediate no[n]-tacky
curing stage as taught by Kneezel et al. as a substrate
into the teaching of Baker et al. for the purpose of
achieving adhesive flowing into the pores to form a
bonding process between the ink chamber wall and the
printhead. [Final Office action at 5.]
We agree with Appellants (Brief at 11-12) that the
rejection must fail for lack of motivation to combine the
teachings of Baker and Kneezel in the manner proposed by the
examiner. Obviousness cannot be established by combining the
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007