Ex Parte MURATA et al - Page 2




              Appeal No. 1999-2684                                                                                        
              Application No. 08/825,400                                                                                  


                                                    BACKGROUND                                                            
              Appellants’ invention relates to a circuit board having solder bumps.  An                                   
              understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 1,                          
              which is reproduced below.                                                                                  
                     1.     A circuit board comprising:                                                                   
                            a substrate having a joining surface; and                                                     
                            a plurality of solder bumps disposed on said joining surface of said                          
                     substrate in such a manner as to form a predetermined profiled line or                               
                     surface pattern;                                                                                     
                            wherein said solder bumps have tops which are free, flat and                                  
                     leveled.                                                                                             

              The prior art reference of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the                              
              appealed claims is:                                                                                         
              Degani                              5,564,617                           Oct. 15, 1996                       
                                                                              (filed June 7, 1995)                        
              Claims 1 and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as being unpatentable over                             
              Degani.  Claims 2-4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable                           
              over Degani.                                                                                                
              Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and                               
              appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the examiner's                        
              answer (Paper No. 20, mailed May 12, 1999) for the examiner's reasoning in support of                       


                                                            2                                                             





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007