Appeal No. 2000-2118
Application No. 08/995,139
OPINION
The Examiner relies on the teachings of Rosenberg for
mounting an optical transceiver device in two different
orientations (answer, page 3). The Examiner further relies on
Lee for showing a semiconductor chip package with U-shaped leads
extending over the edge of the package, which allows mounting in
two different orientations (id.). Finally, the Examiner
concludes that modifying Rosenberg’s device with the package of
Lee for providing “a uniform mounting technique that could be
used for either orientation” would have been obvious (id.).
Appellants argue that the claimed position of the supporting
surfaces on which the housing rests as “arranged on the lateral
face at which the connecting legs emerge from the housing and on
the rear side of the housing” is neither taught nor suggested by
the cited prior art (brief, page 7). Additionally, Appellants
assert that Rosenberg’s device includes mounting feet 128 only on
the rear side of the housing, not on the lateral face from which
leads 126 extend (id.). Appellants also point to Rosenberg’s
tabs 124, which are identified as lead frame tabs, and
distinguish them from the claimed supporting surfaces (reply
brief, page 2).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007