Appeal No. 1998-1628
Application No. 08/384,597
Regarding the claimed energy range, as indicated above,
Suzuki discloses an energy range greater than that claimed by
appellants. The examiner never acknowledges this difference,
but rather states (Final Rejection, page 2) that the apparatus
of Suzuki "has the inherent capability of operation." Thus,
Suzuki fails to suggest the claimed energy range.
Ogata discloses (column 6, lines 15-23) that the energy
for ions should be no higher than 40KeV for reducing defects
in a ceramic material being formed on a metal substrate.
However, there is no suggestion in Ogata to use an energy as
low as 0.5 to 8KeV, as claimed. Ando discloses that energy
for irradiating the surface of a substrate with ions should
range from 0.1KeV to 1KeV, which overlaps the claimed range,
to improve the crystalline properties of aluminum vapor
deposited thereon. However, Ando radiates the ions to
strengthen the vapor deposited aluminum layer, not to form an
intermediate layer between the substrate and the vapor
deposited layer. Therefore, we find no motivation for
applying the recited energy range to Suzuki's formation of an
intermediate mixing layer.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007