Appeal No. 2002-1144
Application No. 09/422,633
(JPS) at the time of filing the present application. Moreover,
we find that Mertesdorf, rather than teaching away from partially
protected polymers, establishes that partially protected polymers
were conventional in the photoresist art, although having the
disadvantage of exhibiting relatively low thermal stability. But
Mertesdorf also teaches that "[o]n the other hand, an increase in
protecting-group content is generally accompanied by a decrease
in the glass transition temperature Tg of the polymers and thus
in the flow resistance as well (dimensional stability of the
relief structures produced)" (column 2, lines 37-41). Hence,
Mertesdorf teaches that there are advantages and disadvantages of
partially protected and fully protected polymers. Indeed,
Mertesdorf provides further evidence of the breadth of blocking
groups within the scope of the appealed claims.
Appellants also maintain that Ito, "the author of the prior
art being applied against the present claims, attributes the
concept of partial protection to the present inventors'
contemporaneous literature publication, not to Ito's own
publication" (page 7 of Brief, second paragraph). However, Ito
references an article by Woods, Lyons, Mueller and Conway,
whereas the present inventors are Merritt, Moreau and Wood. As
for appellants' citation of Przybilla, we agree with the examiner
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007