Appeal No. 1998-2308
Application No. 08/379,868
component is sufficiently large to cause complete
sputtering of oxide coatings formed on the target.
The examiner relies upon the following prior art references as
evidence of unpatentability:
Quazi 4,693,805 Sep. 15, 1987
Scobey et al. 4,851,095 Jul. 25, 1989
(Scobey)
Scherer et al. 4,931,169 Jun. 5, 1990
(Scherer)
Latz et al. 5,122,252 Jun. 16, 1992
(Latz)
Kügler 5,292,417 Mar. 8, 1994
(filing date Apr. 8, 1992)
The following grounds of rejection are presented for our review
in this appeal:
I. Claims 12 and 14 stand rejected under the second paragraph
of 35 U.S.C. § 112 as indefinite. (Examiner’s answer, pages 3-4.)
II. Claims 1 through 9 and 15 through 19 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Kügler in view of Scobey. (Id.
at pages 4-8.)
III. Claims 13 and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over Kügler in view of Scobey, as applied to claims 1
through 9 and 15 through 19, and further in view of Latz. (Id. at
pages 8-9.)
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007