Appeal No. 2000-0314
Application No. 08/944,192
11, 14 and 16, the examiner used the same product-by-process
rationale in connection with the teachings of Hoshino. For
all of the reasons expressed supra, this rationale can not
stand. Even if the teachings of the two references could be
properly combined, the combined teachings would still lack a
photoimaged dielectric layer overlying the metallization
pattern on one side of the core substrate, and a non-
photoimageable dielectric layer overlying the metallization
pattern on the other side of the core substrate. In Tsukada,
a photoimageable dielectric layer 18 is located over the
metallization patterns on both sides of the core substrate
(Figure 2C). In Hoshino, a non-photoimageable dielectric
layer 4a is located over the metallization patterns on both
sides of the core substrate (Figure 1). As a result thereof,
the 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims 1 through
11, 14 and 16 is reversed.
The 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims 12 and 13 is
reversed because the teachings of Bhatt and Ohnuki do not cure
the noted shortcomings in the teachings of Tsukada and
Hoshino.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007