Appeal No. 96-2404
Application No. 08/112,446
areas, respectively, to form a cavity for receiving said IC
module; and
(d) fitting said IC module into said cavity and
fixedly securing said IC module to said card substrate.
The prior art relied upon by the examiner as evidence of
obviousness is set forth below:
Shorin 3,508,754 Apr. 28, 1970
United Kingdom 2 100 669 Jan. 6, 1983
“The admitted state of the prior art”
All of the claims on appeal are rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over the UK reference, “the
admitted state of the prior art” and Shorin.2
We refer to the brief and reply brief and to the answer
for a complete exposition of the opposing viewpoints expressed
by the appellants and the examiner concerning the rejection
before us on this appeal.
OPINION
For the reasons set forth below, we will sustain the
examiner’s section 103 rejection of claims 1 through 11 and 15
2The appealed claims have been grouped and argued
separately as indicated on page 4 of the brief and page 2 of
the answer, and we will appropriately consider the separately
grouped and argued claims in our assessment of the above noted
rejection.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007