Appeal No. 95-3438
Application No. 08/033,656
for the deposition of low temperature oxides and doped
glasses.
In view of the foregoing, the examiner’s rejection of the
appealed claims for obviousness is reversed.
THE ENABLEMENT ISSUE
The appealed claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
112, first paragraph, “enablement requirement” on the asserted
basis that appellants have not disclosed in the specification
“all the critical parameters” to obtain a high deposition rate
which is argued to be unexpected in this art. Observing that
working examples 1 and 2 of the specification involve
processing wherein silicon nitride is deposited under the
identical conditions for two successive runs, the examiner
contends that the identical deposition rate should be achieved
for each run. Because this is not the case, the examiner
apparently believes that appellants changed some undisclosed
parameter between the successive runs reported in examples 1
and 2 that produced the difference in the deposition rates.
On the other hand, appellants submit that working
examples 1 and 2 do teach one skilled in the art how to carry
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007