Appeal No. 2001-0274
Application No. 09/136,527
metal filling the through-hole and forming a via is shown at 212.
While the layer of barrier metal lining the internal surface of
the through-hole and the concave section extending beneath and
undercutting the anti-reflective coating is not specifically
shown in Figure 2, Myers makes clear, at column 7, lines 50-54,
that a thin barrier layer of Ti and TiN are “blanket deposited
over ILD 314 and into via hole 318 and anchor hole 320, with
well-known techniques, such as sputtering.” Thus, Myers clearly
discloses the claimed layer of barrier metal lining the interior
surface of the through-hole and the concave section.
Appellants contend that the description at column 7, lines
50-54, of Myers “does not disclose the geometry of its
adhesion/barrier layer with reference to the undercut portion,
and the notation “(not shown)” concedes that no drawing in
Myers...illustrates what the adhesion/barrier layer is supposed
to look like.”
We agree with the examiner and will sustain the rejection of
claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102(b).
Claim 1 does not call for any specific “geometry of the
adhesion/barrier layer.” It merely calls for a barrier metal
lining the internal surface of the through-hole and the concave
section extending beneath and undercutting the anti-reflective
-4–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007