Appeal No. 2001-2146
Application No. 09/270,588
Based upon the above findings and analysis, the decision of the examiner is reversed.
Furthermore, with respect to the rejection further relying upon Sato, that reference is relied
upon solely for its disclosure of a diazo compound as a photo active agent. Accordingly, it
fails to cure the deficiency of the other references and that rejection is likewise reversed.
REMAND TO THE EXAMINER
On consideration of the record we remand the application to the jurisdiction of the
examiner for appropriate action in accordance with our findings infra. Upon return of this
application to the examiner, the examiner should reconsider the patentability of the claimed
subject matter, with respect to at least claim 1 over the individual reference to Liao alone.
An analysis of claim 1, with respect to each of the limitations disclosed by Liao
appears to support the position that a prima facie case of obviousness may be established by
Liao. The issue to be considered is whether Liao teaches and suggests each of the limitations
required by the subject matter of claim 1.
We find that Liao is directed to a double layer photoresist of two different photoresist
materials. See column 2, line 7. Liao provides for a seven step process wherein a double
layer photoresist coating is placed on a wafer. See column 6, lines 1-14. One layer of the
photoresist is a polymethyl methacrylate. Id. The substrate layer 100 is covered with an
oxide layer 105, which in turn is covered by a polymethyl methacrylate positive photoresist
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007