Appeal No. 2003-1477
Application No. 09/248,533
examiner’s § 112, second paragraph, rejection of claims 4-9
cannot be sustained.
Concerning the § 102 rejections, it is the appellants’ basic
position that the respective Figure 23 embodiments of Prancz ‘570
and Prancz ‘424 do not include the appealed claim step of
“depositing a plurality of contactless-mode module contact zones
on the second side of the carrier layer by means of a printing
method.” As correctly explained by the examiner, however, each
of these Figure 23 embodiments includes contacts 47, 48 (which
correspond to the here claimed “contact-bound-mode module contact
zones”) on one side of carrier 28 and contacts 32, 33 connected
via channels 57, 58 with contacts 4, 5 (which correspond to the
here claimed “contactless-mode module contact zones”) on the
other side of carrier 28. As for their claimed requirement that
the contactless-mode module contact zones be deposited “by means
of a printing method”, the appellants concede that the Figure 23
contacts 4, 5 are deposited via a screen printing method.
Nevertheless, the appellants argue that
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007