Appeal No. 2001-2461
Application No. 08/855,059
The examiner relies on the following prior art references
as evidence of unpatentability:
Demaray et al. 5,330,628 Jul. 19, 1994
(Demaray)
Ho et al. 5,354,712 Oct. 11, 1994
(Ho)
Blackwell et al. 5,372,848 Dec. 13, 1994
(Blackwell)
Shyam P. Murarka and Steven W. Hymes, “Copper Metallization for
ULSI and Beyond,” 20(2) Critical Reviews in Solid State and
Materials Sciences 87-93, 199-120 (1995)(Murarka).
Claims 1 through 4, 12 through 14, and 21 through 23 on
appeal stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as
failing to comply with the written description requirement.
(Examiner’s answer of Jan. 30, 2001, paper 33, page 3; final
Office action, pages 2-3.) Further, appealed claims 1 through
10 and 20 through 23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Demaray in view of Blackwell and Murarka.
(Answer, page 3; final Office action, pages 3-5.) Separately,
appealed claims 12 through 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Demaray in view of Blackwell,
Murarka, and Ho. (Answer, page 3; final Office action, page 5.)
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007