Appeal 2007-0123
Application 10/408,939
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have
used McCullough’s blend of fillers in the thermal interface material of
Duvall. According to the Examiner, the motivation for this combination is
Duvall’s desire to use fillers that maximize packing to produce the most
efficient thermal conductivity and McCullough’s teaching that the disclosed
blend of fillers provides superior thermal conductivity due to the decrease in
the number of interfaces and base matrix thickness between filler members.
(Answer 4).
Appellants contend that the Examiner’s rejection is improper because
Duvall’s composition fails to meet the claim 1 limitation requiring that the
phase change material be contained within a network formed by the
elastomer matrix. (Br. 6). According to Appellants, the thermoplastic
elastomer matrix of the present invention “creates an array of small
encapsulating pockets that contain the phase change material.” (Br. 6).
Appellants contend that Duvall’s polymer material cannot encapsulate the
melting point component because the melting point component and polymer
both melt at the operating temperature range of the heat source. (Br. 6).
Thus, Duvall’s melting point component is dissolved in the polymer, not
contained within a network formed by the polymer matrix as required by
claim 1. (Br. 6). Appellants reference, for example, Duvall’s disclosure that
“[t]he melting point component melts at around the operating temperature
and dissolves the polymer component in the melting point component.”
(Br. 5, (quoting Duvall, col. 6, ll. 38-47)).
During prosecution, claims are given their broadest reasonable
construction in light of the Specification from the standpoint of one of
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013