Appeal No. 2003-2014
Application No. 09/757,185
All of the appealed claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over the admitted prior art in
view of Korleski.
We refer to the brief and reply brief and to the answer for
a thorough discussion of the opposing viewpoints expressed by the
appellants and by the examiner concerning the above noted
rejection.
OPINION
This rejection cannot be sustained for the reasons set forth
below.
A prima facie case of obviousness under § 103 requires a
suggestion for the modification proposed by the examiner and a
reasonable expectation that the proposed modification would be
successful. In re O'Farrell, 853 F.2d 894, 903, 7 USPQ2d 1673,
1680-81 (Fed. Cir. 1988).
According to the examiner, it would have been obvious for
one having an ordinary level of skill in this art to modify the
admitted prior art method for bonding a heat sink to an overmold
surface with silicon-containing residue thereon by replacing the
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007