Appeal No. 1998-2620
Application No. 08/512,033
that “it has been recognized in the CVD art that vacuum line
can be heated in order to eliminate condensation of possible
impurities on internal walls of the line.”
JP ‘775 does disclose a bypass valve used in connection
with the main valve to help reduce particulate contamination
(see page 9 of the translation). However, JP ‘775 does not
disclose or teach the same sequence of steps as recited in
claim 1 on appeal (see the Brief, pages 6-7). For example,
the process of claim 1 on appeal requires the step of opening
the bypass vent before the substrate is removed from the
reaction chamber while JP ‘775 does not disclose or teach this
step at all (translation, page 10, lines 13-15). The
examiner’s statement that the sequence of steps is
optimization and “would have been within the expected skill to
a routineer in the CVD art” (Answer, page 5) is totally
without any factual support or reasoning. “Where the legal
conclusion [of obviousness] is not supported by facts it
cannot stand.” In re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1017, 154 USPQ
173, 178 (CCPA 1967).
For the foregoing reasons and those stated in the Brief,
we determine that the examiner has not met the initial burden
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007