Appeal No. 2005-1099
Application No. 09/334,974
deposition, except that a reactive gas which reacts with the
dislodged target material is introduced into the chamber. In
column 5, at lines 15-21, Moysan teaches that layer 24 is
deposited on layer 22, by any of the well-known and conventional
plating or deposition processes, such as vacuum coating,
reactive sputter ion plating, and the like. The preferred
method is reactive ion sputter plating. As discussed by the
examiner on page 24 of the answer, this is a form of physical
vapor deposition.
With regard to claim 65, appellants argue, on page 8 of the
brief, that this claim recites that the step of drying the
article surface occurs between two minutes and five minutes. As
pointed out on page 25 of the answer by the examiner, Eichholzer
teaches, in the paragraph bridging pages 3-4 of the English
translation, that it is possible to adjust the open time, as
well as the opening and closing frequency, of valve 11,
depending on the application. Therefore, Eichholzer suggests
that the time can be varied. As such, the time recited in claim
65 is prima facie obvious.
With regard to claim 66, on page 8 of the brief, appellants
argue that claim 66 recites the step of subjecting the article
surface “to pulses of air atomizes water droplets on the article
surface”. Appellants argue that Eichholzer and Moysan do not
suggest this claimed feature. We disagree. We refer to the
abstract of Eichholzer wherein it states that “[t]he pulsating
compressed air jets dispel the liquid. As individual amounts or
drops of the liquid to be blown off return to the original spot
after a particular pulse of a compressed air due to wetting
power or gravity, they will be dispelled by the immediately
flowing pulse, and are further reduced in size and blown away”
[emphasis added]. This further reduction in size indicates that
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007