Appeal No. 2001-0460
Application No. 09/030,032
cited to provide a basis for the claimed backer plate “member,”
and our review indicates that such is not taught or contemplated
in this reference.
On the other hand, the examiner appears to rely upon
Jerominek for the teachings of the backer plate “member” in the
body of representative independent claim 1 on appeal. In both
the statement of the rejection portion and the responsive
arguments portion of the answer, the examiner appears to
correlate the flat non-conductive member/wafer 4 as comprising
the claimed backer plate. The examiner also makes reference to
the non-conductive housing 2 as a basis for some features of the
backer plate as well.
The claimed backer plate member requires that it include
side walls extending vertically along the side edges thereof to
define a film-receiving nest. Element 4 in Figures 2 and 4 of
Jerominek clearly does not have side walls itself which extend
vertically to define a film-receiving nest. A separately stated
element, a non-conductive housing 2, is stated by the examiner to
comprise the side walls and the film-receiving nest. Although we
agree with this interpretation of the internal structure of the
non-conductive housing 2 as best depicted in Figure 2 of
Jerominek, these required features are not part of the flat non-
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007