Appeal No. 94-2080
Application 07/982,068
first window has side walls rising in the <100> direction of the
crystal axis, and the second window 95 has side walls rising in
the <110> direction which is at 45 degrees relative to the
direction of the side walls of the first window 94. Figure 10
does not illustrate anything specific about (1) the orientations
of segments AD and BC, or AB and DC, or (2) the angle between
segment AD or BC, and the wafer facet edge, or (3) the specific
orientation of the wafer facet edge. See the discussion of
Figure 10 in Imaizumi’s column 8, lines 49-64.
Other findings of the examiner are also without support and
are incorrect. In the answer, on page 4, lines 7-10, it is
stated that "due to rotation, the (010) and (001) surfaces may be
considered equivalent to the (100) upper surface and may be so
designated." It should be noted that these planes are ordinarily
perpendicular to each other as is shown in Figure 2B of the
appellants’ specification, and that is not changed by any amount
of rotation of the device as a whole. It is without basis to
conclude that these planes are equivalents, especially when the
appellants’ claims specify different elements to be on different
planes. Finally, the examiner has read the appellants’ claims as
though it recites the (110) plane, rather than the (01ù) plane,
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007