Appeal No. 2004-1412
Application 09/818,686
We thus find that in the first illustrated embodiment of Kamioka, heat is dissipated by
means of throughholes 6, with the use of, e.g., silicon grease between the components to improve
heat transfer, while in the second illustrated embodiment, throughholes 6 are also used, but,
according to the translation, in the second illustrated embodiment, silicon gum insulating sheets
12 are used between the components to electrically insulate the components.
We cannot agree with the examiner that one of ordinary skill in this art would have
expected silicon gum insulating sheet 12 to dissipate heat on the basis of the disclosure that
“elements 12 exclude presence of air” (answer, page 4). Indeed, Kamioka discloses that “the
presence of air is excluded for better contact conditions” by using the sheet, which language
taken with the first part of that sentence, “the electrical insulation between the heat generating
component 8 and the frame 3 can be made perfect,” reasonably appears to suggest that electrical
insulation is the reason the sheet is used. We note here appellant’s argument that the silicon gum
insulation sheet 12 is “a rubber-made insulating sheet” (brief, page 8).
Thus, on this record, the examiner’s reliance on Kamioka is misplaced, and accordingly,
because Christopher and Kamioka cannot be combined in the manner suggested by the examiner,
we reverse the three grounds of rejection of all of the appealed claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
Pursuant to our authority under 37 CFR § 1.196(b) (2003), we enter the following new
ground of rejection. Claims 1, 6, 7, 10 through 13 and 15 through 22 are rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combined teachings of Christopher and Miyagi.
As an initial matter, we determine that when considered in light of the written description in the
specification, including the drawings, as interpreted by one of ordinary skill in this art, see, e.g.,
In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-55, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In re Zletz,
893 F.2d 319, 321-22, 13 USPQ2d 1320, 1322 (Fed. Cir. 1989), the plain language of the
appealed claims requires that the claimed printed wiring board, that has an electronic component
with a heat radiating plate mounted on a circuit board, comprises at least a first heat radiating
pattern connected by soldering to the heat radiating plate, and a second heat radiating pattern to
which is soldered heat radiating means on the opposed side of the circuit board, wherein the areas
of the second heat radiating pattern is larger, however small the difference, than the equal areas
- 5 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007