Appeal No. 1997-1201
Application No. 08/200,616
suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art to view both sets of leads and both sides of the
track at the same time in one video display.
The examiner maintains that Spigarelli teaches viewing different sides of a
semiconductor device and multiple images on a common video display. (See answer at
page 10.) We disagree with the examiner. Spigarelli at most teaches viewing multiple
portions of a semiconductor package on a common video display, but not the sides of a
track. Furthermore, Spigarelli is concerned with alignment of the semiconductor rather
than inspection of the leads. Howell is similarly concerned with the alignment of the
semiconductor and not the inspection of the leads. Chemaly views the leads from below
so that the sides of the track are not viewed in the images. The examiner has not set forth
a line of reasoning why it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the
time of the invention to either view the sides of the track or to incorporate calibration marks
thereon. The examiner maintains that “one skilled in the art would certainly have no
difficulty in modifying the single camera system of Howell to provide the multiple viewing of
the combination of images of the first and second sides and calibration marks as shown in
Howell to derive the claimed invention.” (See answer at page 11.) Assuming arguendo
that the skilled artisan would not have difficulty in combining the teachings of the
references, the examiner has not addressed the motivation of the skilled artisan to make
such a combination. (See answer at pages 5-7.) The examiner’s motivation statements
are merely conclusions that the skilled artisan would have been able to make the
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007