Appeal No. 2001-0929
Application No. 08/697,321
sputtering plasma processes equivalently.” Answer, page 5.
Therefore the examiner applies Matossian for the teaching that
relationships between ion plating, ion sputtering, and ion
implanting are old and well known in the plasma art and differ only
in the amount of ion bombardment due to varied energies,
accelerations and materials used (Answer, page 7). Accordingly,
the examiner finds that Matossian supplies “motivation and shows
that the above combination of Gruen and Chan would have been
expected to be effective for ion implantation processes” (Answer,
page 8). We disagree.
As admitted by the examiner, Gruen is directed to coating
conductive workpieces by ionized vapors, i.e., a physical vapor
deposition method (Answer, page 5; Gruen, col. 1, ll. 60-65). Chan
is directed to ion implantation with grounding of the conductive
chamber walls when pulsed negative voltage is applied to the
workpiece (Answer, page 6) but the examiner has failed to present
any convincing evidence or reasoning to support the proposed
combination of Gruen and Chan. Matossian discloses the differences
between ion implantation, ion mixing, and ion deposition (col. 1,
ll. 37-54) and teaches that “plasma processing” is a term of art
that encompasses all of these processes (col. 3, ll. 18-21).
However, Matossian further teaches that these individual processes
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007