Appeal 2007-2916
Application 10/225,502
The Examiner has relied on the following references2 as evidence of
unpatentability:
McCullough US 6,048,919 Apr. 11, 2000
Kawasaki US 6,096,671 Aug. 1, 2000
Nakajima JP 5608373 Jan. 7, 1981
McCullough, Kawasaki and Nakajima qualify as prior art under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b). The Examiner has rejected claims 1-3, 7 and 10 under
35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph (lack of original descriptive support); claims
1-3 and 10-12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over McCullough in
view of Kawasaki; and, claims 1, 3 and 10-12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
obvious over Nakajima in view Kawasaki.4
II. Findings of Fact ("FF")
The following findings of fact are supported by a preponderance of
the evidence of record. To the extent any "finding of fact" is a conclusion of
law, it should be so treated.
A. Appellants' Specification
[1] According to Appellants' Specification, prior art thermally conductive
molding compositions using only alumina as the filler material are
said to be abrasive and, consequently, to cause excessive wear on the
molding equipment (Specification ¶¶ 4, 13).
2 No references to et al. are made in this Decision.
3 This Decision relies on the July 2004 English language translation of
Nakajima by FLS, Inc.
4 The Examiner has withdrawn the final rejections of claim 7 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over McCullough in view of Kawasaki and
over Nakajima in view of Kawasaki; and, of claims 1-3, 7-8 and 10-12 over
Nakajima in view of Kawasaki in further view of McCullough (Examiner's
Answer mailed 26 February 2007 ("Ans."), 3).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013