Appeal No. 2003-0270
Application 09/087,234
difference between the layers, other than their thicknesses, is
that the dense layer is formed from a slurry which does not
contain carbon which burns out to form pores which are closed by
sintering (col. 3, lines 56-63; col. 4, lines 12-15 and 43-45),
indicate that the dense layer contains pores which are smaller
than pores in the porous layer and that the porosity of the dense
layer is less than about half that of the porous layer.
Hence, it reasonably appears that Kondo’s dielectric
structure is the same or substantially the same as that claimed
in the appellants’ claim 4. Consequently, the burden has shifted
to the appellants to show a patentable distinction between the
dielectric structures of the appellants and Kondo, see
Fitzgerald, 619 F.2d at 70, 205 USPQ at 596; Best, 562 F.2d at
1255, 195 USPQ at 433-34, and the appellants have not carried
that burden. Accordingly, we affirm the rejection over Kondo.
Rejection over Gnade
Gnade discloses a dielectric structure (col. 1, lines 34-35)
having a densified porous sublayer (29) with 20% porosity over an
undensified porous sublayer (28) with a porosity greater than 75%
(col. 7, lines 15-20). The average pore diameter of the
dielectric structure preferably is less than 80 nm, more
preferably between 2 nm and 25 nm (col. 3, lines 59-62). The
-7-7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007