Appeal No. 2006-0264
Application No. 10/217,064
Ying '484 as "evidence that succinic acid functions as an
accelerator in electroless nickel plating solutions" (page 5 of
Answer, penultimate paragraph).
We do not understand appellants' argument that "[t]he
Examiner has not provided a single reference that discloses or
suggests a solution containing lead (II) ions" (page 7 of Brief,
sixth paragraph). As pointed out by the examiner, Araki, in the
table at the top of column 12, discloses such a lead ion as a
stabilizer.
Regarding claim 15, appellants maintain that "nowhere does
van der Putten disclose or suggest a layer that includes a nickel
layer and a superjacent gold layer" (page 9 of Brief, last
paragraph). However, as noted by the examiner, van der Putten
teaches an adhesion-promoting layer made of a nickel bump having
a superjacent gold layer. Furthermore, appellants' specification
acknowledges that a gold layer precipitated on a nickel layer by
a wet process was known in the art (page 2 of specification,
lines 8 et seq.).
As for the remaining arguments of appellants with respect to
separate claims, we refer to the Examiner's Answer.
As a final point, we note that appellants base no argument
upon objective evidence of nonobviousness, such as unexpected
-8-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007