Ex parte LEE et al. - Page 3




         Appeal No. 1998-2951                                                      
         Application No. 08/675,692                                                


                   a first layer formed on said primary surface of said            
         substrate and comprising TiN; and                                         
                   a second layer formed on said first layer, said second          
         layer comprising tungsten having a plurality of recessed portions and     
         a plurality of elevated portions adjacent said recessed portions,         
         wherein said second layer covers an entire exposed surface of said        
         first layer.                                                              
              The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner       
         in rejecting the appealed claims are:                                     
         Gonzalez et al. (Gonzalez)        5,262,662      Nov. 16, 1993            
         Kashihara et al. (Kashihara)      5,382,817      Jan. 17, 1995            
         Tanaka et al. (Tanaka)        JP 6-132493        May  13, 1994            
              (Japanese Kokai Patent Publication)                                  
              Claims 28, 29, and 31 through 38 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.      
         § 103 as being unpatentable over Gonzalez in view of Tanaka and           
         Kashihara.                                                                
              Reference is made to the Examiner's Answer (Paper No. 14,            
         mailed November 28, 1997) for the examiner's complete reasoning in        
         support of the rejection, and to appellants' Brief (Paper                 
         No. 13, filed November 12, 1997) and Reply Brief (Paper No. 15, filed     
         January 27, 1998) for appellants' arguments thereagainst.                 
                                     OPINION                                       
              We have carefully considered the claims, the applied prior art       
         references, and the respective positions articulated by appellants        

                                        3                                          





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007