Appeal No. 1998-1669
Application No. 08/508,563
uncertain as to what meaning should be ascribed to the
recitations (i) “in an atmosphere with a controlled partial
pressure of oxygen” and (ii) “interrupting said first step and
performing discharge in an atmosphere where a partial pressure
of oxygen is 1 x 10 Torr or more, which is higher than the-3
partial pressure of oxygen in said first step, to compensate
for the oxygen deficiency in said target.”
Regarding recitation (i), we observe that the
specification does not include a definition for the recitation
“in an atmosphere with a controlled partial pressure of
oxygen.” (Emphasis added.) Indeed, we find that this
recitation was inserted into appealed claim 1 by an amendment
filed March 14, 1996 (Paper 6). Nowhere in the specification
is there a description, much less a definition, of this
recitation. Also, as we have discussed above, the appellant4
argues that the sputtering step in JP ‘746 is not conducted
“in an atmosphere with a controlled partial pressure of
oxygen.” Notwithstanding the appellant’s proposed
4On return of this application, the examiner should also
consider the question of whether the specification, as
originally filed, provides adequate written description for
recitation (i) within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶1.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007