Appeal No. 2005-0874
Application No. 10/320,073
Appellants present the same arguments for claim 23 as
discussed above for claim 22 (Brief, page 9). Accordingly, we
adopt our comments from above.
Appellants additionally argue that claim 23 requires the
heat regulating flange disposed between the rotary drive motor
and the wafer support, with the heat regulating element
positioned between the flange and wafer support, and Kimura does
not disclose this feature (Brief, page 10). This argument is not
persuasive since Kimura has not been relied upon to show all of
the claimed features (Answer, page 7). As recognized by
appellants, Kimura does teach positioning the heat regulating
flange between the motor and the wafer support (Brief, page 10).
When combining the flange feature taught by Kimura with the heat
regulating element and apparatus of Sugimoto, it would have been
obvious to position the flange adjacent or closest to the motor
(and thus the heat regulating element would be positioned between
the flange and the wafer support) since Kimura teaches that
“[t]he mount flange 31b prevents heat generated by the driving
member 31 [the rotary motor] from being transmitted to the spin
chuck 28 and thus to the wafer W through the rotary shaft 31a.”
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007