Appeal No. 2001-0274
Application No. 09/136,527
coating. By teaching that a Ti and TiN barrier layer are blanket
deposited over ILD 34 and into via hole 318 and anchor hole 320,
Myers clearly teaches that a layer of barrier metal lines the
internal surface of the through-hole and the concave section
extending beneath and undercutting the anti-reflective coating.
Notwithstanding the arguments of appellants and the examiner, no
inherency need be shown for this explicit teaching of Myers.
Appellants also argue that sputtering, the only deposit
method disclosed by Myers, will not result in the claimed
structure. Perhaps sputtering will not result in a structure
intended or disclosed by appellants, but Myers is very explicit
in teaching blanket depositing into the via hole and into the
anchor hole which is the concave section extending beneath and
undercutting the anti-reflective coating and so Myers’ structure
will result in a layer of barrier metal lining the internal
surface of the through-hole and the concave section extending
beneath and undercutting the anti-reflective coating, as claimed.
Moreover, Myers does not rely only on sputtering as it clearly
suggests “other well-known techniques,” sputtering being but one
example.
With regard to the rejection of claims 2-6 and 9-16,
appellants merely argue that neither Myers nor Sandhu teaches or
-5–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007