Appeal No. 1999-0382
Application 08/436,133
of material having a slower etch speed than said third dielectric
layer," the "fourth dielectric layer" of claim 8 does not have a
comparable limitation: the layer could be any dielectric
material. We conclude that the Examiner has failed to show
motivation for the addition of a silicon nitride layer in the APA
and has failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness.
Accordingly, the rejection of claims 8-18 is reversed.
CONCLUSION
The rejections of claims 1-4 and 6-18 are reversed.
REVERSED
LEE E. BARRETT )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)) BOARD OF PATENT
MICHAEL R. FLEMING ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
STUART S. LEVY )
Administrative Patent Judge )
- 9 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007