Appeal No. 2005-0585
Application No. 09/821,478
The reduction of microloading permits faster etching of nested
features. Answer, page 11.
The examiner states that Horak similarly solves the problem
of nested/isolation offset in etching an underlayer using a
photoresist mask (the resist mask is not shown in figures; see
col. 5, lines 3-4). The examiner states that Horak uses the
space charge effect in O-RIE similar to Ma and the instant
invention. The examiner states that Horak adjusts the reactive
components to balance the sputtering and etching phenomenon;
this adjustment is similar to the instant invention. This
etching step provides a mask layer with no print bias and thus
subsequent normal etching of the conductor layer becomes
feasible (col. 6, lines 49-col. 7, line 2); this serves the same
function as mask trimming. The examiner states that Horak
clarifies the term “normal etching” to include differential
etching of nested/iso features under the mask (col. 6, lines 21-
36 & col. 9, lines 6-33). Answer, page 12.
The examiner ultimately concludes that appellant’s argument
that the references teach unrelated subject matters, and are
therefore not combinable, is not convincing. Answer, page 12.
With regard to appellant’s contention that the applied
references do not teach each and every element of the instant
claims, on page 13 of the answer, the examiner states that it
has been shown, supra, that the combination of references
teaches each and every element of the instant claims. We refer
to pages 13-16 of the answer regarding the examiner’s additional
statements in this regard.
C. Our Analysis
With regard to appellant’s assertions that (1) the applied
references are not combinable, and (2) the combination does not
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007