Appeal No. 2002-1025 Page 6
Application No. 09/454,354
We therefore conclude that the combined teachings of Brunelli and Duescher fail
to establish a prima facie case of obviousness with regard to the subject matter recited
in claim 1, and we will not sustain the rejection of claim 1 or, it follows, of claims 2-16,
which are dependent therefrom.
Independent apparatus claim 17, which reads as follows, also stands rejected on
the basis of Brunelli and Duescher.
17. An apparatus for chemical-mechanical polishing a workpiece, the
apparatus comprising:
a fixed abrasive element; and
a dispenser for dispensing hot water onto the fixed abrasive element.
It should be recognized at the outset that this claim is not directed to
preconditioning a pad. Brunelli discloses a fixed abrasive element for planarizing a
workpiece, as well as a system for periodically removing from the abrasive element
waste material accumulated thereon during the planarizing operation. This waste is
removed by contacting the fixed abrasive element (polishing pad) with a conditioning
disk either concurrently with the planarization operation or in a separate step (column 5,
lines 41-46). The conditioning operation “is expedited by supplying the planarizing liquid
244 to the planarizing surface 242 during conditioning,” which “augments the
conditioning disk” (column 6, lines 3-5). The planarizing liquid is disclosed as being “a
solution having no additives, or it may be a slurry having abrasives and/or chemical
agents” (column 5, lines 1-3), which may be heated in a vessel and then directed
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007