Appeal No. 2003-0548 Page 4
Application No. 09/370,599
transport chambers wherein both at least one CVD1 processing
chamber and at least one PVD2 processing chamber (or at least one
means for CVD and at least one means for PVD) are disposed on the
second transport chamber. The substrate that is processed may be
a semiconductor wafer.
According to the examiner, Sato discloses multi-chamber
wafer processing equipment that essentially corresponds to the
structure required by appellants’ first claim grouping but for
disposition of the PVD and CVD means (chamber).3 See page 3 of
the answer wherein the examiner refers to the figure 7 embodiment
of Sato and a portion of the text of Sato.
The examiner (answer, page 3) takes the position that “[i]t
would have been obvious to couple a PVD chamber and a CVD chamber
to the same transfer chamber (129) of Sato because such an
arrangement would be a mere rearrangement of the conventional
processing chambers so as to produce the desired sequence of
1 chemical vapor deposition
2 physical vapor deposition
3 Both appellants and the examiner have represented that a
CVD chamber or CVD means as claimed is a distinct structure from
a PVD chamber or PVD means as claimed as evident by the arguments
brought before us in appeal. We decide this appeal based on that
undisputed and seemingly agreed upon understanding of the claimed
subject matter on this record.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007