The opinion in support of the decision being entered today
is not binding precedent of the Board.
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte MAOCHENG LI, JOHN HOLLAND,
VALENTIN N. TODOROV, PATRICK LEAHEY,
ROBERT P. HARTLAGE and HOAN HAI NGUYEN
__________
Appeal No. 2005-1219
Application No. 09/774,192
___________
ON BRIEF
___________
Before FRANKFORT, PATE, and HORNER, Administrative Patent Judges.
PATE, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 28, 33-39 and 42. Claims 3, 16-18 and
22-27 have been withdrawn from consideration as being direct to non-elected subject matter.
Claims 19 and 29-32 have been cancelled. Claims 1, 2, 4-15, 20, 21, 28 and 33-42 stand finally
rejected. As noted above, only claims 28, 33-39 and 42 are indicated as appealed. 37 CFR
§ 41.37(c)(iii). Any appeal as to claims 1-2, 4-15, 20, 21, 40 and 41 is dismissed.
The claimed invention is directed to an apparatus for processing a semiconductor wafer.
The claimed subject matter may be further understood with reference to claim 28 appended to
appellants’ brief.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007