Appeal No. 2000-1482 Page 11
Application No. 08/995,706
defining a wafer contact surface longer than the wafer contact
surface defined by the first transfer plate.
The appellants argue that the applied prior art does not
suggest the claimed subject matter. We agree. Specifically,
the applied prior art does not teach or suggest
interchangeable first and second wafer transfer plates
mountable to the transfer arm. In that regard, while both the
H-Square Publication and Yap do teach transfer arms, they do
not teach or suggest using interchangeable first and second
wafer transfer plates mountable to the transfer arm. To
supply this omission in the teachings of the applied prior
art, the examiner made a determination (answer, page 3) that
this difference would have been obvious to an artisan.
However, this determination has not been supported by any
evidence that would have led an artisan to arrive at the
claimed invention.
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the
examiner to reject claim 22 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007