Ex parte FRISBIE et al.

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Oct 30, 1998

07969541 (B.P.A.I. Oct. 30, 1998)

Application for patent filed October 30, 1992. 1
According to the appellants, the application is a continuation
of Application No. 07/582,819, filed September 13, 1990, which
is a continuation of Application No. 07/413,034, filed
September 27, 1989.
In the parent application, the Board in a decision dated2
June 10, 1992 found claims 1 and 9 to be anticipated by the
THIS OPINION WAS NOT WRITTEN FOR PUBLICATION
The opinion in support of the decision being entered
today (1) was not written for publication in a law
journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the
Board.
Paper No. 42
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte MILO W. FRISBIE and MAVIN C. SWAPP
____________
Appeal No. 97-1042
Application No. 07/969,5411
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before HAIRSTON, KRASS and JERRY SMITH, Administrative Patent
Judges.
HAIRSTON, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 10,
13 through 15 and 18 through 20.2
Appeal No. 97-1042
Application No. 07/969,541
teachings of Pfaff, and claims 2 through 8 to be obvious over
the combined teachings of Pfaff and Cedrone.
2
The disclosed invention relates to a method of testing a
semiconductor device.
Claim 10 is illustrative of the claimed invention, and it
reads as follows:
10. A method of testing a semiconductor device,
comprising the steps of:
providing a plurality of wiping contacts;
providing a semiconductor device having a plurality of
leads;
positioning the semiconductor device wherein the
plurality of leads are between, but not making electrical
contact to the plurality of the wiping contacts;
moving the semiconductor device in one direction from the
point where the plurality of leads are between, but not making
electrical contact to the plurality of the wiping contacts
past the plurality of the wiping contact wires such that the
plurality of the leads of the semiconductor device are no
longer between the plurality of wiping contacts, wherein at
least one of the plurality of wiping contacts makes electrical
contact to a side of one of the plurality of leads of the
semiconductor device during the moving of the semiconductor
device.
The reference relied on by the examiner is:
Vancelette 4,320,339 Mar. 16,
1982
Appeal No. 97-1042
Application No. 07/969,541
3
Claims 10, 13 through 15 and 18 through 20 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Vancelette.
Reference is made to the brief and the answers for the
respective positions of the appellants and the examiner.
Appeal No. 97-1042
Application No. 07/969,541
4
OPINION
We have carefully considered the entire record before us,
and we will reverse the obviousness rejection of claims 10, 13
through 15 and 18 through 20.
Appellants argue (Brief, page 4) that “Vancelette is not
believed to show or make obvious . . . moving the
semiconductor device in one direction . . . past the plurality
of the wiping contacts . . . wherein at least one wiping
contacts [sic, contact] makes electrical contact to a side of
one of the leads during the moving of the semiconductor
device, as applicants claim.” Appellants and the examiner
agree (Brief, page 4; Answer, page 4; Supplemental Answer,
page 2) that cooperative measurement contacts 70 and 72 in
Vancelette perform a “static measurement” (column 4, lines 35
through 51) on leads L of components C (Figures 1 and 6
through 9). Accordingly, the obviousness rejection is
reversed because of the lack of any movement between the leads
L and the measurement contacts 70 and 72 when they are in
electrical contact.
Appeal No. 97-1042
Application No. 07/969,541
5
DECISION
The decision of the examiner rejecting claims 10, 13
through 15 and 18 through 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is
reversed.
REVERSED
KENNETH W. HAIRSTON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
ERROL A. KRASS ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
JERRY SMITH )
Administrative Patent Judge )
jrg
Appeal No. 97-1042
Application No. 07/969,541
6
Vincent J. Rauner, Motorola, Inc.
Intellectual Property Department
P.O. Box 10219
Scottsdale, AZ 85271-0219
JENINE GILLIS
Appeal No. 97-1042
Serial No. 07/969,541
Judge HAIRSTON
Judge KRASS
Judge JERRY SMITH
Received: 27 Oct 98
Typed: 27 Oct 98

DECISION: REVERSED

Send Reference(s): Yes No
or Translation(s)
Panel Change: Yes No
3-Person Conf. Yes No
Remanded: Yes No
Brief or Heard
Group Art Unit: 2213
Index Sheet-2901 Rejection(s): ___________
Acts 2: ____
Palm: ____
Mailed:
Updated Monthly Disk (FOIA): ____
Updated Monthly Report: ____