Appeal No. 2006-0473
Application 10/430,558
OPINION
For the reasons set forth by the examiner as amplified here,
we sustain the rejections of all claims on appeal.
The subject matter of independent claim 1 very closely
resembles the subject matter of independent claim 11 on appeal.
Whereas the last clause of claim 1 on appeal recites a dual
damascene pattern liner coupled at least partially between said
vias and said dielectric material but not between said trenches
and said dielectric material, claim 11 recites that this liner is
coupled at least partially between said trenches and said
dielectric material but not between said vias and said dielectric
material.
Before we continue with our analysis, we make reference to
the examiner tutorial as to what is a dual damascene pattern
liner and a single damascene pattern liner as expressed at pages
5 and 6 of the answer. As pointed out by the examiner here,
these terms relate to processes in the art such that in a dual
damascene process, only a single metal deposition step is used to
simultaneously form metal lines in trenches and metal in the
vias. The examiner also notes that even though a via or a trench
structure may be typically in a single dielectric layer,
structures formed in multilayer dielectrics are also common in
the art. This analysis has not been questioned by appellants
since no reply brief has been filed. We therefore agree with the
examiner’s observations at page 6 of the answer that the
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007