Appeal No. 2005-1220
Application No. 09/270,606 Page 15
Kodera employs a dummy structure (stopper layer), which is
excluded by the representative claim, as argued by appellant.
As explained at the bottom of page 6 of appellant’s
specification, approaching the ideal polishing characteristics as
depicted in Figure 1 (blanket polishing rate of high structure
areas) results in such a pattern independent polishing rate, that
is, a rate that is the same for high and low density high
structure areas. Because we have found that the applied prior
art would have reasonably suggested using a CMP slurry having the
property of allowing for polishing rates for the high structure
areas that approximate the blanket polishing rate for reasons
discussed above, we also find that the argued characteristic of
the CMP slurry of claim 17 would also reasonably have been
expected to result from employing a modified slurry as suggested
by the applied references for the Figure 19 embodiment of Kodera.
Moreover, as far as the polysilicon layer 203 and the amorphous
silicon film 233A of Kodera in other embodiments thereof as
referred to at page 13 of appellant’s brief are concerned, we do
not consider those layers to be a dummy structure as excluded by
representative claim 17. In this regard and as we reported in
footnote 2 above, appellant defines a dummy structure as a
structure that is used for the sole purpose of controlling the
CMP rate. Kodera, however, employs the polysilicon layer 203 for
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007