Appeal No. 2005-0767
Application No. 09/817,694
immersing into an electroless plating solution a plurality of
semiconductor wafers that are positioned parallel to each other.
Also, appellants do not contest the examiner's finding that
Shacham-Diamand describes the claimed rotating of the wafers at a
constant speed and creating periodic relative motion in changing
directions between the plating solution and the wafers. It is
appellants' singular contention that holder 226 of Shacham-
Diamand does not meet the claimed requirement for "a plurality of
support means." Appellants maintain that Figure 5 of the
reference does not show sufficient detail and that "[h]older 226
appears to be a unified structure and is thus not 'a plurality of
support means'" (page 3 of Brief, third paragraph).
We agree with the examiner that the appearance of reference
holder 226 as a unified structure does not disqualify it as
comprising a plurality of support means. See Sentry Protection
Products, Inc. & Hero Products, Inc. v. Eagle Mfg. Co., (CAFC,
04-1392, 3/11/2005). Appellants have pointed to no definition
in their specification that would preclude the claimed plurality
of support means being a unified structure. In our view, the
fact that holder 226 of Shacham-Diamand is described as
supporting a plurality of wafers necessarily results in holder
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007