Appeal No. 1999-2512
Application No. 08/888,499
From these findings, the examiner concludes that it would have been
obvious to use other plasma techniques known for silicon dioxide
deposition in the process of Homma (Answer, page 17).
Even assuming arguendo that it would have been obvious to use
the plasma creation techniques taught by Chebi and Nguyen in the
process of Homma, we determine that the limitations of the claims
on appeal would not have been met. The processes recited in claims
29 and 39 on appeal do not merely require a plurality of power
sources, each having a different frequency, but also requires that
the power sources are operated simultaneously. The examiner has
not addressed this limitation of the claimed subject matter nor
pointed to any disclosure or teachings of the secondary references
regarding this limitation. See Nguyen, col. 3, 11. 7-18 and 36-48,
and Chebi, col. 3, 11. 22-34, both of which appear to suggest that
deposition occurs sequentially, each at a specified frequency.
For the foregoing reasons, we determine that the examiner has
failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness in view of
the reference evidence. Accordingly, we reverse the examiner's
rejection over Homma in view of Chebi or Nguyen.
13
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007