Appeal No. 2001-2085
Application No. 09/104,409
The examiner argues that while it may be that no applied reference teaches the
measurement of a resistance characteristic of the cobalt film prior to the generation of
the cobalt silicide, it is “a well-known experimental procedure to test before, during and
after a process has been completed” and it is “inherent with the combinations listed
above that testing in the form of a resistivity measurement would be made before
during and after silicide formation has to take place, in order to understand what
happens during the process if any abnormalities occur during the intrinsic portion of the
resistance-temperature curve” [answer-pages 6-7].
The examiner’s argument is not well-taken. Where the examiner relies on
inherency, the examiner must provide a basis to reasonably support the determination
that what the examiner alleges is inherent must necessarily occur. In re Levy, 17
USPQ2d 1461, 1464 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1990). The mere fact that a certain thing
MAY result from a given set of circumstances is not sufficient to establish inherency. In
re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1534, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1957 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
The examiner has failed to show that the measurement of a resistance
characteristic prior to silicidation necessarily occurs from a combination of the applied
references. Accordingly, there is no showing of inherency and no suggestion in the
combination of applied references of measuring a resistance characteristic of the cobalt
film prior to generating a cobalt silicide.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007