Appeal No. 95-3017
Application 07/952,061
including all the limitations of the base claims and any
intervening claims.
Representative claim 1 is reproduced below:
1. A reticle blank for use in fabricating a reticle to
pattern a radiation sensitive layer in a lithographic printer,
said reticle blank having a region comprising a pattern of
features, said features having a size that is below the
resolution of said printer, wherein said region transmits a
reduced portion of radiation incident thereon, said reduced
portion of radiation being relatively uniform underneath said
pattern.
The following references are relied on by the examiner:
Smith et al. (Smith) 4,890,309 Dec. 26, 1989
Pease et al. (Pease) 5,135,609 Aug. 4, 1992
Claims 1 to 6, 9 to 12, 15 to 25 and 28 to 31 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite. In
a new rejection under this statutory basis in the answer, the
examiner included claims 7, 8, 22, 23, and 25 in this rejection.
As such, the claims on appeal under this statutory basis remain
claims 1 to 12, 15 to 25 and 28 to 31.
Claims 1 to 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) as
being anticipated by Pease.
Claims 7 to 12 and 19 to 31 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being obvious over the collective teachings of Pease in
view of Smith. The examiner incorrectly includes dependent claim
25 in this grouping, which claim depends directly from claim 13
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007