Appeal No. 2002-0579 Page 2
Application No. 09/324,780
BACKGROUND
The appellant’s invention relates to a semiconductor package. A copy of the
claims under appeal is set forth in the appendix to the appellant’s brief.
The examiner relied upon the following prior art references in rejecting the
appealed claims:
Johnson et al. (Johnson) 5,969,947 Oct. 19, 1999
(filed Dec. 17, 1997)
Williams et al. (Williams) 6,043,125 Mar. 28, 2000
(filed Nov. 10, 1997)
Oppermann et al. (Oppermann) 6,093,971 Jul. 25, 2000
(filed May 2, 1997)
The following rejections are before us for review.
(1) Claim 24 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as containing
subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to
reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor, at the time the
application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
(2) Claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 10 and 20-23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as
being anticipated by Oppermann.
(3) Claims 5, 6, 11 and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Oppermann.
(4) Claims 3 and 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable
over Oppermann in view of Williams.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007