Appeal No. 96-2162
Application No. 08/265,561
However, appellant now argues that such a combination of
the reference teachings would result in a stack of dimorphs
with insulators therebetween, in contradistinction to that
required by the instant claims. While the instant claims do
not recite the negative limitation “without insulation
therebetween,” the claims do require “direct physical and
conductive electrical contact” (independent claims 4 and 12)
or “conductive electrical contact” (independent claim 11).
Therefore, if the double lines between, above and below
elements 45 and 47 in Figure 2 of Heinz are, indeed,
insulators, then it appears that appellant would have a point
that the proposed combination would not result in the claimed
subject matter requiring the dimorphs to have contact
(physical and/or electrical) with each other.
We have considered the declarations of Mr. Gordon W.
Culp, who is also the applicant in the instant case, and we
find that the evidence presented therein would tend to
indicate that the double lines in Heinz must be insulators.
As Mr. Culp explains in detail, at pages 3-4 of exhibit A
appended to the brief, in order to provide for the disclosed
and desired motion of the wafers in Heinz, the adjacent
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007