Appeal No. 1998-1211
Application No. 08/448,955
in the art to form a plurality or sequence of such markers
contingent upon the thickness of the layer being etched and
the accuracy of the etch required in the ultimate product. We
find that our conclusion of obviousness is only buttressed by
appellants' acknowledgment in the present specification that
it was known in the art to use multiple markers throughout the
depth of a layer to be etched (see paragraph bridging pages 2
and 3 of specification). While appellants make the argument
that Fujii employs some formation device to form the
adsorption layer, appealed claims 7, 12, 26 and 27 do not
preclude the use of any such formation device.
Appellants' arguments relating to the claimed
"homogeneous markers" vis-à-vis the adsorption layer of Fujii
have been addressed in our decision in appellants' parent
application, which reasoning we incorporate herein. Also,
appellants have advanced no argument based upon objective
evidence of nonobviousness with respect to methods within the
scope of claims 7, 12, 26 and 27.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, the examiner's
rejection of claims 4-6 and 15-25 is reversed. The examiner's
rejection of claims 7, 12, 26 and 27 is affirmed.
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007