Appeal No. 96-0633
Application 07/971,041
rejection of claim 11 and its respective dependent claims 13
through 15.
Finally, we reverse the reaction of claim 19 and its
respective dependent claims 20 through 23 essentially for the
same reasons we reversed the rejection of claim 11. The
claimed first filling layer recites the subject matter
essentially in the same manner as recited for the filling
layer of independent claim 11 on appeal. Additionally, we
would be hard pressed to agree with the examiner’s rationale
as to the second filling layer of a conductive material being
formed only in the second aperture as set forth at the end of
claim 19 on appeal for similar reasons.
In view of the foregoing, to the extent claims 1 to 15
and 19 to 23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103, we sustain
the two separate rejections only as to claims 1 through 3, 5
through 7, 9 and 10. Therefore, the examiner’s decision is
affirmed-in-part.
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007