Appeal No. 1999-1121
Application No. 08/752,865
Claim 4 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Krueger in view of Fukuhara.
Claim 5 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Krueger in view of Fukuhara and
Siden.
Reference is made to the brief (paper no. 13) and
the answer (paper no. 14) for the respective positions of
the appellants and the examiner.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the entire record
before us, and we will sustain the 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
rejection of claims 3 and 6, and the 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
rejection of claim 2. On the other hand, we will reverse
the 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) rejections of claims 4 and 5.
Turning first as we must to the 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
rejection of claims 3 and 6, we agree with the examiner
(answer, pages 3 and 4) that Krueger discloses (Figure 2)
an electrically conductive wire 1, a first solder ball 4
fixed on the wire in loop 3, a second solder ball 4'
fixed on the wire in loop 3' that is distinct from the
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007