Appeal No. 2005-2353 Page 4
Application No. 10/028,860
To establish inherency, the extrinsic evidence must make clear that the missing
descriptive matter is necessarily present in the thing described in the reference, and that
it would be so recognized by persons of ordinary skill. Inherency, however, may not be
established by probabilities or possibilities. The mere fact that a certain thing may result
from a given set of circumstances is not sufficient. See In re Robertson, 169 F.3d 743,
745, 49 USPQ2d 1949, 1950-51 (Fed. Cir. 1999).
The appellants argue that Fujisaki does not disclose a cooling fluid directly
contacting and moving laterally across the active surface 1 of an integrated circuit die as
set forth in the claims under appeal. We agree. Fujisaki teaches that cooling fluid
directly contacts and moves laterally across the top surface of the semiconductor
element. However, there is no teaching in Fujisaki that the top surface of the
semiconductor element is an active surface. In fact, in view of heat fins and heat sinks
being mounted to the top surface, it is likely the top surface of the semiconductor
element is an inactive surface. As to the bottom surface of the semiconductor element
(which appears to be an active surface), there is no disclosure in Fujisaki that the
cooling fluid can directly contact and move laterally across the bottom surface of the
1 The "active surface'' of an integrated circuit die is the side of the integrated
circuit die on which electrical components are formed. See page 1 of the appellants'
specification.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007