Appeal 2007-1104
Application 09/962,697
the invention, to look to particular sources, to select particular elements, and
to combine them as combined by the inventor. Ruiz v. A.B. Chance Co., 234
F.3d 654, 665, 57 USPQ2d 1161, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2000).
“[A]n implicit motivation to combine exists not only when a suggestion
may be gleaned from the prior art as a whole, but when the ‘improvement’ is
technology-independent and the combination of references results in a
product or process that is more desirable, for example because it is stronger,
cheaper, cleaner, faster, lighter, smaller, more durable, or more efficient . . . .
In such situations, the proper question is whether the ordinary artisan
possesses knowledge and skills rendering him capable of combining the
prior art references.” DyStar Textilfarben GmbH & Co. Deutschland KG v.
C.H. Patrick Co., 464 F.3d 1356, 1368, 80 USPQ2d 1641, 1651 (Fed. Cir.
2006).
ANALYSIS
35 U.S.C. § 102 REJECTION
As set forth above, representative claim 13 recites, inter alia, (1) a
plurality of electrically conductive elevations commonly formed and
separated from a base substrate, and (2) the electrically conductive
elevations having a height greater than the height of the electrically
conductive bumps. As detailed in the findings of fact section above, we
have found that figure 2B of Fukutomi teaches the elevations as having a
height that is greater than the height of the gold bumps to the same extent
that figure 10 of Appellants’ drawings disclose that limitation. (Findings of
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013