Appeal No. 2003-0272
Application No. 09/478,497
term “replica component” could not reasonably be interpreted to mean a commercially
available, off-the-shelf electronic component.
However, the disposition of the instant case does not turn on the breadth of the
recitation “replica component.” We agree with appellants’ position, as advanced at the
oral hearing, that even if the term “replica component” failed to distinguish over off-the-
shelf components, there is no evidence of motivation in the record before us for making
the proposed combination.
With respect to the “wave soldering” argument of the Answer, we acknowledge
that the text at column 6 of Peterson does not expressly teach that components are not
attached to test printed circuit board 40 at the wave soldering station in the
manufacturing line depicted in Figure 4. Peterson does make clear (col. 6, ll. 23-27)
that components, not shown, are attached to terminals on off-the-shelf printed circuit
boards 50.
However, the test vehicles disclosed by Peterson do not have circuit pads
extending about the edge of the circuit pattern for receiving components. As shown in
Figures 1 and 3, the parallel electrical conductors 14 (Fig. 1) terminate in conductor
headers 16, 18, 20, 26, and 28, which connect with terminal bars 22 and 30. Peterson
col. 4, ll. 50-65. We thus find that Peterson does not disclose or suggest attaching a
component to circuit pads on a circuit board test vehicle.
The circuit pads (54; Fig. 3) to which the components are attached in Bardsley
are part of multi-chip module (MCM) 32, which includes chips 34, 36 and substrate 38.
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007