Appeal No. 2004-1015
Application No. 09/619,869
connecting the heat sink to bolster plates 65-1 and 65-2 attached
to the circuit board.
In proposing to combine Jones and Gonsalves to reject claims
1, 9 and 14, the examiner concludes (see page 3 in Paper No. 14)
that it would have been obvious in view of Gonsalves to modify
Jones by incorporating a thermal interface pad and means for
aligning and securing the heat sink and printed circuit board in
order to (1) enhance thermal conduction between the electronic
package and the heat sink and (2) facilitate alignment of the
heat sink relative to the circuit board.2
The appellant does not specifically dispute this proposed
combination of Jones and Gonsalves. Instead, the appellant
argues (see pages 6 and 7 in the brief) that the appealed
rejection is unsound because the proposed reference combination
does not provide for all of the elements set forth in independent
claims 1, 9 and 14. In addition to listing several elements in
each of these claims which purportedly are missing from the Jones
and Gonsalves combination, the appellant submits that “a
combination of Jones and Gonsalves . . . teaches both fine
2 As Jones teaches the use of a thermal interface material
or pad, the examiner’s application of Gonsalves to provide this
feature is unnecessary.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007