Appeal No. 2004-2379
Application No. 09/710,769
Appellants’ claimed invention is directed to an electrode
arrangement for the plasma-aided coating of a substrate. The
arrangement employs a gas supply for protecting the front of the
cathode from unwanted deposition of material. The protective gas is
supplied through an intermediate space between a baffle arrangement
and cathode material and escapes through the baffle opening towards
the plasma discharge.
Appealed claims 1, 13, 14 and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as being anticipated by Akamatsu. Claims 25-27 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Akamatsu
in view of Klaus.
We have thoroughly reviewed the respective positions advanced by
the appellants and the examiner. In so doing, we concur with
appellants that the examiner has failed to establish a prima facie
case of anticipation and obviousness under U.S.C. § 102 and 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 respectively. Accordingly, we will not sustain the examiner’s
rejections.
We consider first the examiner’s rejection under § 102. We are
in complete agreement with appellants that the gas emanating through
cathode 5 of Akamatsu through the opening in the cathode section or
enclosure 2 fails to meet the claim requirement for
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007