Ex Parte Eidson et al - Page 8


             Appeal 2007-1098                                                                                 
             Application 10/026,059                                                                           
         1   increasing the thermal mass of the electronic component as is required by the                    
         2   means-plus-function element in the applicants’ claims.   Noticeably absent is any                
         3   finding by the Examiner that typical potting material dissipates heat as well as                 
         4   metal or ceramic.                                                                                
         5         For the foregoing reasons, the rejection of claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 12, and 13 as               
         6   unpatentable over Luce is without merit, and the rejection of claims 14, 15, 17, 18,             
         7   and 20 as unpatentable over Luce and Kirkpatrick is also without merit.                          
         8   Kirkpatrick as cited and applied by the Examiner does not make up for the above-                 
         9   noted deficiencies of Luce.  The rejection of dependent claim 6 as unpatentable                  
        10   over Luce and Khan is without merit because Khan as cited and applied by the                     
        11   Examiner does not make up for the deficiencies of Luce.                                          
        12   G. New Grounds of Rejection                                                                      
        13         Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Luce.                 
        14   The level of ordinary skill in the art is such that the hypothetical person of ordinary          
        15   skill in the art would have recognized that electronic components generate and                   
        16   dissipate heat energy during operation and that different materials have different               
        17   rates of thermoconductivity.  The hypothetical person of ordinary skill also would               
        18   be familiar with the term thermo mass, with the first and second laws of                         
        19   thermodynamics, and with the information expressed in the Background portion of                  
        20   the applicants’ specification.                                                                   
        21         Claim 1 recites a circuit comprising (1) “an electronic component having an                
        22   enclosure that protects the electronic component,” and (2) “structure that surrounds             
        23   the enclosure and that reduces a thermal drift of the electronic component by                    
        24   increasing a thermal mass of the electronic component.”  The term enclosure does                 
        25   not appear in the specification.  Nor does it appear in any original claim.  Viewed              
        26   in light of the specification, said “enclosure” is that enclosed space between the               

                                                      8                                                       

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013