Appeal No. 1997-4027
Application No. 08/300,111
invention. Pro-Mold & Tool Co. v. Great Lakes Plastics, Inc., 75 F.3d 1568, 1573, 37
USPQ2d 1626, 1630 (Fed. Cir. 1996).
All of the appealed claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over the combination of Anderson and Narita.
Upon careful review of the entire record including the respective positions
advanced by Appellants and the Examiner, we find that the Examiner has carried his
burden of establishing a prima facie case of obviousness for the subject matter of
claims 1 and 10. This prima facie case has not been effectively rebutted by Appellants.
There is no dispute that Anderson, like claim 1, discloses a chemical vapor
deposition chamber comprising susceptor support for a substrate to be processed, a
preheat ring surrounding said susceptor support, a plurality of external heating lamps for
heating the susceptor support, the substrate thereon and the preheat ring, a source of
precursor gas that provides laminar flow of gas sequentially across the preheat ring and
the substrate to an exhaust port. Appellants urge Anderson differs
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007