Appeal No. 2005-2014 Παγε 5
Application No. 09/792,737
the Examiner asserts that the claimed thickness of 2 nm would have been obvious to a
person of ordinary skill in the art because the purpose of the layer is to prevent the
diffusion of atoms from one material into another and thus the thickness is a result
effective variable. (Answer, p. 5). The Examiner cites the Hong reference for teaching
that the claimed thickness for a barrier layer is recognized by persons of ordinary skill in
the art. Hong discloses the thickness can range from 10-300 Angstroms (1-30 nm) (col.
4, ll. 32-35). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have sufficient skill to determine
the appropriate thickness required to prevent the diffusion of atoms into adjacent layers.
The Appellants have not directed us to evidence which establishes that the claimed
thickness provides unexpected results.
Appellants argue that Nogami is not combinable with Simon or other art using
TaN liners because Nogami strongly teaches against the use of tantalum-containing
material, such as the claimed TaN, as a barrier material because of its tendency to
oxidize. (Brief, p. 3). Appellants also argue that Nogami is silent on using ALD and
does not provide motivation to use the claimed thickness for the barrier layer. (Brief, pp.
3-4).
Appellants’ arguments are not persuasive. A person of ordinary skill in the art
would have recognized the properties associated with using a barrier layer comprising
Ta component. Just because a reference discloses a disadvantage to using a particular
component for the described invention does not prevent a person of ordinary skill in the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007