Appeal No. 1996-0200
Application 08/119,444
Like appellants, Arai discloses a susceptor used in a vacuum chamber of a reactor
for the treatment of materials used in semiconductor devices. Arai describes his
susceptor as comprising an aluminum substrate with an anodic aluminum coating thereof
and an electrically insulating coating on the aluminum oxide coating. Arai differs from the
instant element in that Arai does not describe the surface of the aluminum substrate and
how the anodic coating is formed. In view of the background of appellants’ invention, we
must presume that the Arai uses the prior art technique in the formation of the anodic
coating.
To modify Arai, the examiner has relied upon Chen. Chen as described in II, supra
is directed to an aluminum foil capacitor containing an anodized aluminum coating.
However, we find that the examiner has failed to point to any suggestion, teaching or
general knowledge in the relevant art that would have motivated one of ordinary skill in the
art to combine the diverse teachings of Arai and Chen.
VII.
Claim 23-28 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Arai and
Chen as in 7. further in view of Bajza.
For a discussion of the rejection of the instant element claims over Arai in view of
Chen , see VI.
13
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007