Appeal No. 2003-1021
Application 09/507,507
2. Claims 1, 9, 13 and 16-22 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by Gondusky.
3. Claims 2-4, 8, 10-13 and 15 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over Gondusky.
4. Claims 23 and 24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as obvious over Gondusky in view of Toy.
We reverse as to all four grounds of rejection.
BACKGROUND
High efficiency integrated circuit devices, such as
central processing units for computers, typically generate
significant amounts of heat energy during operation. Specifi-
cation, page 1, lines 17-20. If the heat is not continuously
removed, the device may be damaged or experience a reduction in
operating performance. Id. at lines 20-22. One method of
removing excess heat from central processing units is to use a
heat sink device. Id. at lines 23-24. Problems typically
encountered with heat sinks include wear and tear on the
underlying electronics due to thermal cycling and damage to the
electronics resulting from inefficient heat dissipation. Id.,
page 2, lines 9-11 and 30-32. The purpose of the present
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007