Appeal 2007-1055
Application 10/831,012
Regarding separately argued claims 14 and 19 which specify that the
thermally conductive elements are patterned to lie between intersections of
transmission lines, we agree with the Examiner that it would have been
obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to select any particular pattern for
the thermally conductive elements in the absence of evidence of criticality.
However, Appellants have proffered no such evidence of record.
We will not sustain the Examiner’s § 103 rejection of the appealed
claims over Swanson in view of Gotro. We agree with Appellants that there
is no factual basis for concluding that electrical transmission lines (34) of
Swanson are separated from substrate (30) by a dielectric material. The
Examiner appreciates that the dielectric layer separating the electrical
transmission lines from the substrate is not shown in the drawing but cites
Swanson at col. 4, ll. 15-30. However, we agree with Appellants that there
is no basis for interpreting the relevant portion of Swanson as teaching or
suggesting a dielectric layer between the transmission lines and the
substrate.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, the Examiner’s decision
rejecting the appealed claims is affirmed.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013