Appeal No. 2000-0422
Application 08/864,044
experimentation for an artisan in appropriate circumstances,
however, in the present case, neither of the two references,
singly or in combination, would lead an artisan in the direction
of formulating a process of routine experimentation to obtain the
recited thicknesses in an effort to optimize the bonding of the
printed circuit board to a base substrate as recited in the
claim, because the applied prior art does not demonstrate a
desirability for such an endeavor.
Therefore, we do not sustain the obviousness rejection of
claim 1 and its dependant claim 5 over Iliou and Kukanskis.
Accordingly, the decision of the Examiner rejecting claims 1
and 5 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
REVERSED
JOSEPH F. RUGGIERO )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
PARSHOTAM S. LALL ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
HOWARD B. BLANKENSHIP )
Administrative Patent Judge )
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007