Appeal No. 2006-0364
Application No. 10/068,400
obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to apply pressure to
the chip during cooling in the process of Oxman.
Although Uchiyama, as argued by appellants, discloses that
pressure is removed after the temperature reaches 150°C during
the cooling process, we concur with the examiner that it would
have been a matter of obviousness for one of ordinary skill in
the art to maintain the pressure throughout the entirety of the
cooling step. It is well settled that when patentability is
based upon a change in a process parameter, such as temperature,
pressure and concentration, the applicant must demonstrate that
the change is critical, i.e., it leads to a new and unexpected
result. In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934,
1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ
233, 235 (CCPA 1955). Since appellants have not proffered any
objective evidence which establishes that maintaining the
pressure until room temperature is reached produces an unexpected
result, the inference of obviousness established by the prior art
remains unrebutted. Also, we agree with the examiner that:
[O]ne skilled in the art would have readily appreciated
maintaining the pressure as long as necessary in order
to ensure proper adhesion and that such is a function
of a variety of factors, such as the material worked
upon, the curing properties of the adhesive, the
thermal coefficients of expansion of the materials,
etc.
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007