Appeal No. 1996-3194
Application 08/218,802
inherency, each and every element of a claimed invention as
well as disclosing structure which is capable of performing
the recited functional limitations. RCA Corp. v. Applied
Digital Data Systems, Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385,
388 (Fed. Cir. 1984); cert. dismissed, 468 U.S. 1228 (1984);
W. L. Gore and Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d
1540, 1554, 220 USPQ 303, 313 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied,
469 U.S. 851 (1984).
The examiner indicates how he reads the claims on the
disclosure of DeBalko [answer, pages 4-5]. Of particular note
is that the examiner reads the force applying means of claim 1
on any of contacts 42-44, contacts 21-27 or contacts 63 and 64
of DeBalko [id., page 4]. With respect to clamp contact 44,
appellants argue that neither clamp 44 and cover part 54 nor
clamp 44 and base part 20 are of unitary construction as
recited in claim 1 [brief, page 6]. With respect to contacts
21-25, appellants make the same argument just discussed as
well as arguing that these contacts do not provide a force on
the semiconductor assembly to retain the semiconductor
components together as recited in claim 1 [id.].
With respect to the latter argument, we agree with
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007