Appeal No. 95-3942
Application No. 08/008,976
for manipulation of the radiation throughout the entire length of
the beam, as is the case with metastable rare gas atoms.
Appealed claim 6 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by McMillan.
Upon careful consideration of the opposing arguments
presented on appeal, we will not sustain the examiner's
rejection.
It is fundamental that to constitute anticipation under
35 U.S.C. § 102 all material elements of a claim must be present
in one prior art source. In re Marshall, 578 F.2d 301, 304,
198 USPQ 344, 346 (CCPA 1978); In re Kalm, 378 F.2d 959, 962,
154 USPQ 10, 12 (CCPA 1967). In the present case, we concur with
appellant that McMillan fails to describe within the meaning of §
102 the claimed step of "directing a beam of metastable rare gas
atoms onto a surface of a lithographic resist" (emphasis added).
We appreciate that McMillan, at column 5, lines 24-28, discloses
that "significant radiation from the collision zone consists of
metastable or ground state atoms, free radicals, and
electromagnetic radiation (light). In general, this radiation
emanates in all directions from the collision zone." However,
McMillan discloses that it is ions and vacuum ultraviolet light
that is directed onto the resist. McMillan provides no
description of directing a beam of metastable rare gas atoms onto
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007