Ex parte BLACKWELL et al. - Page 2




                Appeal No. 1998-0036                                                                                 Page 2                   
                Application No. 08/431,203                                                                                                    


                                                             BACKGROUND                                                                       

                         Appellants’ invention relates to a method and apparatus for applying a metal coating onto an                         

                organic material.  Claims 1 and 14 are illustrative:                                                                          

                         1.  A method of improving the adhesion of a metal to an organic material which has an affinity                       
                for moisture, comprising the steps of:                                                                                        
                         positioning the organic material within a vacuum system;                                                             
                         outgassing the vacuum system in order to reduce the moisture content of the organic material to                      
                about 1% to about 2% by weight;                                                                                               
                         bombarding the organic material with plasma; and                                                                     
                         vacuum metallizing at least one layer of metal onto the organic material.                                            

                        14.  A roll sputter system comprising an oxygen DC glow chamber and a chill drum section,                            
                wherein the oxygen DC glow chamber is positioned inline apart from the chill drum section.                                    

                         The prior art references of record relied upon by the Examiner in rejecting the appealed claims                      

                are:                                                                                                                          

                Meckel et al. (Meckel)                            4,322,276        Mar. 30, 1982                                              
                Lindsay et al. (Lindsay)                          4,395,313                Jul.  26, 1983                                     
                Sartor et al. (Sartor)                            4,455,207                     Jun.  19, 1984                                
                Ho et al. (Ho)                                    4,720,401                                 Jan.  19, 1988                    
                Sallo                                             4,863,808                               Sep.   5, 1989                      
                Swisher                                           5,112,462                                 May 12, 1992                      



                         Claims 1-7, 9, 11, and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over                            

                Swisher and Lindsey in view of Sartor and Ho.  Claim 10 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as                              

                being unpatentable over Swisher and Lindsey in view of Sartor and Ho and further in view of Sallo.                            









Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007