Appeal No. 2003-0907
Application No. 09/337,278
137 (Fed. Cir. 1986); In re Sernaker, 702 F.2d 989, 991, 217 USPQ 1, 3 (Fed. Cir.
1983).
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the Examiner
and the Appellants concerning the above-noted rejections, we refer to the Answer
and the Briefs. For the reasons set forth below, we will sustain the Examiner’s
rejections.
DISCUSSION
Appellants in the specification, page 1, disclose that in conventional cleaning
methods for electronic devices the object to be cleaned is wiped using a sponge
while supplying water to the object. This method provides the object with a high
degree of cleaning. Appellants have discovered that the object being cleaned is
adversely charged with electricity due to the wiping with the sponge.
Miyashita discloses that semiconductor devices can be cleaned using pure
water having a resistivity of about 5 MScm to 18 MScm from which impurities
such as ions, fine particles, germs are removed. (Col. 1, ll. 22-25). Miyashita, like
Appellants, recognize that wiping the semiconductor with a brush (sponge) material
that came into contact with the device was known. (Col. 1, ll. 34-38). Miyashita
acknowledges that in conventional cleaning the liquid is supplied to the outer
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007