Appeal No. 2002-0510 Page 22
Application No. 09/139,309
Claims 17 and 18 specify in pertinent part the following limitations: "a layer of
neat dielectric polymer or glass in contact with at least one of said first, second and
third layers wherein the neat dielectric polymer or glass layer is present in a thickness of
less than about 1.6 mils." Giving the claims their broadest, reasonable construction, the
limitations require a layer of neat dielectric polymer or glass featuring a thickness of
less than about 1.6 mils.
"In In re Aller, 42 CCPA 824, 220 F.2d 454, 105 USPQ 233 (1955), the [U.S.
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals] set out the rule that the discovery of an optimum
value of a variable in a known process is normally obvious." In re Antonie, 559 F.2d
618, 621, 195 USPQ 6, 8 (CCPA 1977). There are, however, exceptions to the rule.
The case "in which the parameter optimized was not recognized to be a result-effective
variable, is [one such] exception." Id. at 621, 195 USPQ at 9. See also In re Yates,
663 F.2d 1054, 1057, 211 USPQ 1149, 1151 (CCPA 1981) ("Table 1 examples, taken
as a whole, support appellant's position that degree of conversion was not recognized
to be a result-effective variable.")
Here, although the passage cited by the examiner mentions that Downing's
"unitary assembly of varistors is closely jacketed by an insulation cover 28 (FIGURE 2)
whereby the unit may be inserted into the cylindrical shell 12 and potted therein with
Page: Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007