Appeal No. 1998-0908
Application No. 08/506,292
Examiner’s prima facie case of obviousness. Any arguments which
Appellants could have made but elected not to make in the Briefs
have not been considered in this decision (note 37 CFR § 1.192).
Appellants’ response initially attacks (Brief, pages 12-18)
the relevance of the disclosures of the primary King '405 and
King '241 references to the claimed subject matter. As to King
'405, Appellants’ arguments focus on their contention that, in
contrast to the “testing” limitations in the appealed claims,
King '405 is not concerned with testing at all. With regard to
King '241, Appellants’ arguments center on the assertion that,
although King '241 discloses circuit testing, there is only one
wafer involved, in contrast to the claimed two-wafer test system.
In making this assertion, Appellants contend that the only wafer
disclosed in King '241 is “product” wafer 12, with interconnect
element 13 constructed only of passive material with no active
circuitry that could support its characterization as a second
wafer as claimed.
We do not find either of these arguments of Appellants to be
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007