Appeal No. 97-0169
Application No. 08/194,369
curve and use the selected curve to determine the thickness as set forth in the language of
claim 1.
The Examiner asserts that appellant’s argument on page 6 of the brief concerning
Parobek using only a single calibration sample is “absurd and is unsupported by evidence
or logic.” (See answers at page 5.) The Examiner states that “Parobek has explained that
the composition of the calibration sample must match that of the test sample, which
requires that there must be as many different calibration compositions as there are test
compositions. This is precisely why the Parobek device comprises means for measuring
composition before measuring thickness.” (See answer at page 5.) The Examiner does
not cite to any portion of Parobek to support this conclusion or asserted suggestion. Our
review of the teachings of Parobek shows that there is no suggestion for the use of plural
curves. Parobek states that:
It is still another object of the present invention to provide an
apparatus which utilizes a built-in calibration sample to enhance accuracy,
precision and consistency of the measurements provided by the apparatus. .
. .
The test results from an unknown sample are compared to test results
from a calibrated known sample to provide quantitative results. . . .
It is an advantage of the present invention that it provides an
apparatus which simultaneously measures both thin film thickness and
concentration of selected elements therein. (Emphasis added.) (See col.
1, line 50 - col. 2, line 14.)
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007