Appeal No. 2003-1269
Application 09/041,913
Claims 20 and 21
Claims 20 and 21, which depend from claim 19, require,
respectively, that the temperature and the rate of varying are
altered in response to the monitoring of the initial growth
pattern of the material layer.
The examiner argues, regarding claim 20, that “Roy teaches
altering an overall temperature trend from a first phase (lower
temperature limit) to a second phase (upper temperature limit)
(col. 5, lines 44-50)” (answer, page 10). The periodic
oscillation discussed in the portion of Roy relied upon by the
examiner occurs following formation of the nucleation layer. The
examiner has not established that the oscillation is in response
to monitoring of the initial growth pattern of the polysilicon.
The examiner provides no argument regarding claim 21.
Accordingly, we reverse the rejection over Roy in view of
Parker of claims 20 and 21.
Rejection over Lee in view of Parker
Claims 1, 4-6, 8, 19 and 23-25
Lee discloses a method for providing uniformity of the
thickness of a chemical vapor deposition layer, such as silicon
dioxide, on a semiconductor wafer by either increasing or
decreasing the wafer temperature during deposition to alter the
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007