Appeal No. 2001-2455
Application 08/439,490
been motivated to have employed Urbanek’s tension maintaining
support structure in the apparatuses of the primary references.
See Kotzab, 217 F.3d at 1371, 55 USPQ2d at 1317 (“[P]articular
findings must be made as to the reason the skilled artisan, with
no knowledge of the claimed invention, would have selected the[]
components for combination in the manner claimed.”).
The Federal Circuit requires that the Board set forth
its findings and the grounds thereof as supported by the agency
record, and explain its application of the law to the found
facts. In re Lee, 277 F.3d 1338, 1344, 61 USPQ2d 1430, 1433-34
(Fed. Cir. 2002). In the present case, the record is simply
devoid of any findings by the examiner as to why one of ordinary
skill in the art would have been motivated to have utilized
Urbanek’s tension supporting structure in the apparatuses of the
primary references.
Claim 14
Claim 14 is directed to a “removable” sputtering target
assembly which comprises both a replaceable target unit and a
cooling jacket connected to the back of the target unit. Landau
discloses a sputtering apparatus wherein the target is removable.
See, e.g., claim 1. However, there is no indication that a
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007