Appeal No. 96-3649
Application 08/344,509
claim language apparently refers to graphite susceptor 52.
However, Sladek’s teaching of the vapor phase hydrolysis of a
metal alkoxide by passing water and alkoxide vapors and nitrogen
over a substrate in a isothermal rectangular reactor at least
implies the presence of a substrate heating means structure for
carrying out a hydrolysis/condensation reaction necessary to
produce a stoichiometric family of metal oxide films.
Appellants contend that appealed claims 6, 7, 18, 23 and 29
distinguish over the prior art because they require an annealing
step which differs from the annealing procedure described in the
references. With respect to this argument, as the examiner has
clearly pointed out, Sladek teaches air annealing at 350 to
1000EC which causes crystallization of an amorphous film. How
appellants’ claimed annealing step differs from the prior art
annealing is not apparent. Thus, we think these claims are also
properly rejected. Likewise, although appellants argue that
appealed claims 18 and 23 require the formation of a ?perfect?
crystal structure, appellants have not addressed the disclosure
in Sladek that the air annealing step, which caused crystal-
lization, produced anything other than perfect crystalline films.
Finally, while appellants indicate that none of the references
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007