Appeal No. 1998-0908
Application No. 08/506,292
evidence as a whole and the relative persuasiveness of the
arguments. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d
1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992); In re Hedges, 783 F.2d 1038, 1039,
228 USPQ 685, 686 (Fed. Cir. 1986); In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d
1468, 1472, 223 USPQ 785, 788 (Fed. Cir. 1984); and In re
Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1052, 189 USPQ 143, 147 (CCPA 1976).
With respect to independent claim 57, the Examiner proposes
to modify either of the King '241 or King '405 references with
Moriya, suggesting (Answer, pages 5 and 6) that Moriya corrects
any deficiencies in the King references in disclosing a compliant
interconnect with conductive fibers. In the Examiner’s view
(final Office action mailed July 23, 1997, Paper No. 12), the
skilled artisan would have found it obvious to use fine wires
instead of conductive particles in an interconnect structure to
achieve a more reliable contact through the use of solid
conductors.
After reviewing the prior art references in light of the
arguments of record, it is our view that the Examiner's analysis
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007