Appeal No. 1998-2620
Application No. 08/512,033
of establishing a prima facie case of obviousness for the
subject matter of claim 1 on appeal. Accordingly, the
examiner’s rejection of claims 1, 3, 5 and 6 under 35 U.S.C. §
103(a) over the admitted prior art in view of JP ‘775 and
Ozaki is reversed.
The examiner has further applied Chiang against claim 2
for the teaching of forming silicon nitride films by LPCVD
using a mixture of ammonia and dichlorosilane (Answer, page
5). The examiner has applied Ilderem against claim 4 for the
teaching of forming polysilicon films by LPCVD using a
precursor gas comprising SiH (Answer, page 6). Therefore it
4
is clear that the additional references to Chiang and Ilderem
fail to remedy the deficiencies noted above in the rejection.
Accordingly, the examiner’s rejection of claim 2 under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) over the admitted prior art in view of JP
‘775, Ozaki, and Chiang is reversed. Similarly, the
examiner’s rejection of claim 4 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over
the admitted prior art in view of JP ‘775, Ozaki and Ilderem
is reversed.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007