Appeal No. 1999-2117
Application No. 08/795,197
We agree with the appellant’s fundamental position
that the applied references contain no teaching or
suggestion which would have motivated one having ordinary
skill in the art to combine these references in such a
manner as to result in a plasma processing method of the
type here-claimed wherein dissociation of a processing
gas is controlled by setting an applied source power
lower than a source power corresponding to the
discontinuous change defined by the independent claims on
appeal. Indeed, as correctly indicated by the appellant
in his brief, many of the references applied by the
examiner are not even concerned with the here-claimed
goal of controlling dissociation of a processing gas.
Moreover, none of the applied references contain any
teaching or suggestion for effecting this control by
setting an applied source power lower than a source power
corresponding to a discontinuous change of the type
claimed by the appellant. For example, while the Sakai
Patent relates to controlling dissociation in order to
enhance selectivity, this is effected by increasing flow
rate (e.g., see Figure 11 and the paragraph bridging
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007