Appeal No. 2001-2085
Application No. 09/104,409
silicide film after annealing. The examiner turns to Powell, pointing specifically to
Powell’s teaching of determining the temperature of wafer processing in metal silicide
formation from a sheet resistance measurement and of correlating the resistance
measurement to a temperature value through a resistivity-temperature plot. The
examiner concludes that it would have been obvious “to modify Fiory’s process with a
resistance measurement before annealing in order to provide the resistivity-temperature
plot and temperature value determination of Powell..., an initialization resistivity
measurement at the beginning of the annealing process” [answer-pages 4-5].
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 13 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
because it is our view that the examiner’s reasoning, leading to the conclusion of
obviousness, is flawed.
While Powell shows a graph which indicates how the resistivity of a silicon
substrate varies over temperature, we agree with appellant that Powell provides no
teaching or suggestion that a film is formed over the silicon substrate and that a film
resistivity measurement is taken prior to thermal processing. Since none of the applied
references suggests taking a resistivity measurement prior to thermal processing, and,
accordingly, determining a temperature of the thermal processing using the resistance
characteristic of the cobalt film and the cobalt silicide, the claimed subject matter is not
made obvious, within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 103, based on Fiory, Wolf and Powell.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007