Appeal No. 96-0626
Application 08/187,328
37 USPQ2d 1237, 1239, citing W. L. Gore & Assocs. v. Garlock,
Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1553, 220 USPQ 303, 312-13 (Fed. Cir.
1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
2. Appellants assert that the Examiner has failed
to establish a prima facie case of obviousness to use silicon
or diamond-like carbon as an insulator, and to adjust their
electrical resistivity and thermal conductivity ranges (Brief
at page 11 et seq.). The Examiner responds that silicon and
diamond-like carbon are per se known insulators, and that
routine experimentation and optimization would result in the
claimed ranges since the results(insulation with better heat
dissipation) would be expected, and not lead to something
unobvious (Answer at page 6, lines 13-18, and response to
Reply Brief, Paper No. 13, page 5, paragraph 5).
Appellants do not dispsute that silicon and diamond-
like carbon are well known insulators, and we find that
experimentation and optimization will result in the claimed
ranges. Determining the optimal values of result effective
variables would have been obvious and ordinarily within the
skill of the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276, 205 USPQ
215, 219 (CCPA 1980). With regard to the electrical
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007