Appeal No. 2003-0053
Application No. 09/142,464
varied, the examiner merely speculates on a modification to Ogiso without regard to
why Ogiso selected the specific shape disclosed and what impact a change may have
on the operation and manufacturing of the device of Ogiso. Therefore we find that the
examiner has not provided a convincing line of reasoning why it would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the shape of the connection end of
the lead in Ogiso.
At the oral hearing appellant’s representative was asked if the difference in the
shape was significant to the operation of the claimed invention. Appellant’s
representative stated that appellant disputes the shape with respect to the motivation to
modify the teachings of the prior art references applied by the examiner. Appellant’s
representative further stated that the shape was not as significant as the use of the“UV-
setting type resin disposed on said piezoelectric resonator having a short setting time,
the fixing layer fixing the leading end portions of said leads and said piezoelectric
resonator element prior to formation of said connecting layer.” The UV setting resin is
used to tack the connection leads to the resonator body to allow a better connection of
the connection layer. Furthermore, appellant’s representative stated that although
Ogiso does disclose the use of a UV setting resin, it is used to connect the resonator 1
in Fig. 11 to a ceramic case 32 rather than to connect to the piezoelectric element.
(See answer at page 4, Ogiso at columns 9, 11 and 13.) We agree with appellant that
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007