Appeal No. 1998-1681 Page 10
Application No. 08/523,075
F.2d 1540, 1553, 220 USPQ 303, 312-13 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert.
denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984); In re Rothermel, 276 F.2d 393,
396, 125 USPQ 328, 331 (CCPA 1960). Consequently, we reverse
the § 103 rejection of claims 26-33 and 35 over Elliott in
view of Miura, Nakai and Lewis and the § 103 rejection of
claims 26-35 over Elliott in view of Miura, Nakai, Lewis and
Muller.
We now turn to appealed claims 20-25. Those claims are
directed to a process including the steps of exposing the
entire surface of a substrate to which photoresist was applied
and removing the exposed photoresist. Then, ultraviolet rays
and heat are used in irradiating the substrate surface after
photoresist removal to allow polymerization of any gel
substances that remain on the substrate surface. Thereafter,
the ultraviolet ray irradiated substrate surface is irradiated
with a laser beam. Light from the latter step is intercepted
to determine whether a gel substance is present or not.
With regard to the examiner’s § 103 rejection of claims
20-25 over Miura in view of Suzuki and Elliott, the examiner
(answer, page 7) takes the position that:
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007