Appeal No. 98-1643
Application No. 08/544,582
intended, or, in the alternative, the tester/logic circuit 134
provides the input signals to, and measures outputs from, the
circuit under test, in which case the instant claims are still
met since one might argue that the claims are broad enough to
permit one element to be both the “testing set” and the
“semiconductor chip or wafer...in direct contact with said
integrated circuit under test.”
Appellant’s arguments are clearly narrower than the
instant claim language would require. That is, in accordance
with the instant claim language, a single element may perform
the functions of both the claimed testing set and the
semiconductor chip or wafer in direct contact with the circuit
under test. Further, the instant claim language does not
require the testing set to actually have any testing function
(it merely supplies inputs to, and measures outputs from, the
circuit under test) and certainly no testing function separate
and apart from the testing function of the semiconductor chip
or wafer.
Thus, we find that Leedy’s disclosure does anticipate
instant claims 1 and 2 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). The
examiner’s decision is affirmed.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007