Appeal 2007-0998
Application 10/708,066
only, but a heat sink facilitates cooling by dissipating distributed heat from
the structure to the ambient via conduction and convection (Br. 4-5; Reply
Br. 4-5).
The Examiner argues that element 20 in Toy inherently functions as a
heat sink since it not only distributes heat more evenly, but also dissipates
heat to the surrounding environment. In this regard, the Examiner notes that
one embodiment of Toy provides an extended surface for element 20 that
dissipates heat (Answer 4-5). Appellants respond that this embodiment of
Toy would not significantly increase the cooling rate with respect to smaller
lids, but would rather spread heat conducted to the lid throughout a larger
structure (Reply Br. 5).
For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
ISSUES
(1) Have Appellants established that the Examiner erred in
interpreting lid 20 as a “heat sink” as recited in representative claim 1?
(2) Have Appellants persuasively rebutted the Examiner’s prima facie
case of obviousness for claims 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18, and 20?
FINDINGS OF FACT
At the outset, we note that the Examiner’s findings regarding the
specific teachings of Toy and Boyer (Answer 3-4) are not in dispute except
with respect to the Examiner’s interpretation of lid 20 in Toy as a “heat
sink” noted above. Accordingly, we will adopt the Examiner’s factual
findings regarding the cited references as they pertain to the undisputed
claim limitations.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013