Appeal No. 1999-1047 Page 3
Application No. 08/238,598
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and the
appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the Answer (Paper
No. 44) and the Supplemental Answer (Paper No. 47) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the Supplemental Brief (Paper No. 46) and
Reply Brief (Paper No. 47½ ) for the appellants’ arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to the
appellants’ specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner. As a consequence of
our review, we make the determinations which follow.
The appellants’ invention is directed to improving the operation of the gas
distribution plates utilized in semiconductor wafer processing equipment. It provides a
cooling system for the gas distribution plate which prevents the tungsten hexafluoride gas
and the silane gas being passed therethrough from forming a layer of tungsten silicide on
the inner surface of the plate, which would then flake off to contaminate the system
(specification, pages 1-4). The invention has been disclosed in the context of a retrofit that
can be installed on a prior art apparatus, in which the cooling system provided for the
process gas inlet manifold is interfaced with the cooling system that is incorporated into
the gas distribution plate by the invention.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007