Appeal No. 2005-0303
Application No. 09/928,884
include a heat sink element, passivation material, and a seal element in order to protect
the inner components of the assembly from EMI interference and environmental
pollution. The examiner notes that appellants are merely remedying a common problem
within the electronics industry by providing a heat sink and seal elements.
The examiner’s reasoning appears cogent to us.
Appellants first argue (principal brief-page 6) that neither Natsume nor Denzene
teaches an automotive engine controller with a partitioned circuit assembly. We find
this argument to be unpersuasive for the reasons, supra, since we find that Natsume
does, indeed, suggest an automotive engine controller with a partitioned circuit
assembly, as broadly claimed.
Next, appellants assert that Denzene constitutes non-analogous art since it
teaches a circuit assembly for use on outdoor telecommunications boxes. While
appellants recognize that such boxes will experience environmental conditions, “they do
not come anywhere near the conditions experienced by an engine controller...”
(principal brief-page 6).
The test for analogous art outside an inventor’s field of endeavor is whether the
art pertains to the particular problem confronting the inventor. In re Clay, 966 F.2d 656,
659, 23 USPQ2d 1058, 1060 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
While Denzene’s box may be outside of appellants’ endeavor, i.e., engine
controllers, Denzene clearly teaches those skilled in the art of protecting electronic
circuits of the need for heat sinks, seals and passivation material, the problem
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007