Appeal No. 2002-0204
Application No. 09/154,243
be allowable when they are rewritten in independent form
including all of the limitations of the base claim and any
intervening claims. See the Advisory Action dated April 21,
2000, Paper No. 8.
APPEALED SUBJECT MATTER
According to appellants, “[t]he claims stand or fall
together.” Therefore, for purposes of this appeal, we select
claim 22 and determine the propriety of the examiner’s rejection
based on this claim alone consistent with 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7)
(2000).2 Claim 22 is reproduced below:
22. A modified substrate, comprising:
a substrate; and
disposed on and in contact with said substrate, a plurality
of at least 106 features comprising material deposited on said
substrate wherein said features have a packing density of at
least 104 features/cm2, wherein said features cover a patterned
area on said substrate that is at least 1" across, and wherein
said features have a minimum feature size of less than 200 nm.
REFERENCE
The examiner relies on the following sole prior art
2
2See In re McDaniel, 293 F.3d 1379, 1383, 63 USPQ2d 1462,
1465 (Fed. Cir. 2002)(“If the brief fails to meet either
requirement [of 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7)(2000)], the Board is free to
select a single claim from each group of claims subject to a
common ground of rejection as representative of all claims in
that group and to decide the appeal of that rejection based
solely on the selected representative claim.”).
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007