Appeal No. 2002-1823
Application 09/575,551
Modifying the Iwai method in the manner proposed by the examiner
so as to move the articles/wafers from a horizontal orientation
to a vertical orientation as the engagement head transfers them
to the shelf would be counterproductive in that the articles
would have to be moved back to the horizontal orientation for
receipt by the wafer boat 6 and insertion into the process tube
1. Moreover, there is nothing in the combined teachings of Iwai
and Kawabata which would have motivated the artisan to
reconstruct the Iwai apparatus to process or treat the wafers in
a vertical orientation.
It is therefore evident that the only suggestion for
combining Iwai and Kawabata in the manner proposed by the
examiner so as to arrive at the method recited in independent
claims 56 and 65 stems from hindsight knowledge impermissibly
derived from the appellants’ disclosure. Consequently, we shall
not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims
56 and 65, and dependent claims 57, 62 and 64, as being
unpatentable over Iwai in view of Kawabata.
SUMMARY
The 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, rejection of claims
56, 57, 62, 64 and 65 is sustained; the 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph, rejection of claim 65 and the 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007