Ex Parte Bjelopavlic et al - Page 2



          Appeal No. 2005-1108                                                        
          Application No. 10/442,900                                                  
          (specification, page 1).  Representative claim 1 reads as                   
          follows:1                                                                   
               1.  A wafer carrier for retaining at least one semiconductor           
          wafer in a processing apparatus during a processing operation               
          which removes wafer material by at least one of abrading and                
          chemical reaction, said processing apparatus adapted for removing           
          wafer material from a front side and a back side of each wafer              
          simultaneously, the carrier comprising:                                     
               a plate including wafer contaminating material and having an           
          opening and a thickness; and                                                
               an insert having a thickness and being disposed in the                 
          opening of the plate for receiving at least one wafer and                   
          engaging a peripheral edge of the wafer to hold the wafer as the            
          carrier rotates, the thickness of the insert being at least about           
          20 microns greater than the thickness of the plate to inhibit               
          removal of the contaminating material from the plate during                 
          processing and thereby inhibit contamination of the wafer.                  
                                 THE PRIOR ART                                        
               The references relied on by the examiner to support the                
          final rejection are:                                                        
          Desai et al.              5,422,316           Jun. 06, 1995                 
          (Desai)                                                                     
          Zhang et al.              6,454,635           Sep. 24, 2002                 
          (Zhang)                                                                     


               1                                                                      
               1 In the event of further prosecution, steps should be taken           
          to correct the lack of proper antecedent basis in claim 5 for the           
          reference to “the surface area of exposed metal” and the                    
          inconsistency between the preambles of dependent claims 21                  
          through 25 and the subject matter recited in parent claim 20.               
                                          2                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007