Appeal No. 2005-0789
Application No. 10/410,000
substrate [emphasis added], and that Watson does not suggest
this aspect of the claimed invention.
On page 7 of the answer, the examiner argues that Watson
teaches electroplating on a conductive panel (brass panel). The
examiner therefore equates this with electroplating a conductive
seed layer, and the examiner states that a seed layer is usually
utilized when electroplating copper on a semiconductor
substrate.
We first note that appellants’ claim 1 uses the word
“comprising”, which is an open-ended term. As such, appellants’
claim 1 can also include electrodeposition of a metal on a seed
layer.
Watson’s brass panel is preplated with a seed layer of
copper. See column 10, lines 39-42. Hence, Watson teaches to
use a plating solution for electrodeposition on a seed layer.
Also, as stated by the examiner on page 5 of the answer, the
seed layer, being conductive, would enable improved
electroplating of copper onto the underlying substrate (whether
the substrate is a brass panel or some other material such as a
semiconductive substrate). Given the fact that it was common in
the industry to use a metal seed layer on a semiconductor
substrate, we agree with the examiner that use of the plating
solution of Watson to conduct such a process would have been
obvious.
In view of the above, we therefore affirm the 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 rejection of claims 1-13 and 15-24.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007