Appeal No. 2005-2489
Application No. 09/949,736
intervening claims.” See the Supplemental Answer, page 2. We1
have jurisdiction pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 134.
APPEALED SUBJECT MATTER
The subject matter on appeal is directed to an apparatus for
removing a plastic encapsulant from an integrated circuit. See
the specification, page 1. The apparatus includes a chamber, a
stage, a laser and a means for relatively moving a plastic
encapsulated integrated circuit with respect to a laser beam
(different from the stage). See, e.g., claim 19. The stage “is
an X, Y positioning table . . . . Such X, Y positioning tables
are well known in the art.” See the specification, page 3. A
hinge may be provided at one end of the table so that the plastic
encapsulated integrated circuit can be rotated to a substantially
vertical position. Id. “In its vertical position, the laser
beam 26 has an acute angle of incidence on the surface of the
[plastic encapsulated integrated circuit].” Id. Details of the
appealed subject matter are provided in illustrative claims 19
and 37, which are reproduced below:
1Claim 28 recites “means for adjusting the orientation
. . . ” corresponding to the hinge limitation recited in claim
39. However, the examiner has not indicated it to be allowable
over the prior art cited. Nor has the appellant specifically
argued the patentability of this limitation in the Brief.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007