Appeal No. 2004-2226
Application NO. 10/066,421
§ 112, ¶ 1. The test for compliance with the written description
requirement is whether the disclosure of the application as
originally filed reasonably conveys to the artisan that the
inventors had possession at that time of the later claimed
subject matter, rather than the presence or absence of literal
support in the specification for the claim language. In re
Kaslow, 707 F.2d 1366, 1375, 217 USPQ 1089, 1096 (Fed. Cir.
1983). The content of the drawings may also be considered in
determining compliance with the written description requirement.
Id.
The first area of concern to the examiner involves the
various limitations in the claims requiring attachment of the
ends of the first and second bonding wires by either a stitch
bond or a ball bond. By way of example, claim 1 requires the
first end of the first wire to be attached to the semiconductor
die with a ball bond, the second end of the first wire to be
attached to the interposer pad with a stitch bond, the first end
of the second wire to be attached to the interposer pad with a
ball bond and the second end of the second wire to be attached to
the lead with a stitch bond. Page 4 in the original
specification describes a first end of a first wire 20 as being
attached to the semiconductor die with a ball bond 12, a first
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007