Appeal No. 2006-1870 Παγε 7
Application No. 10/100,901
hardness and density lower range limits are critical because
density and hardness values below these limits make it difficult
to effectively polish the semiconductor wafer. Appellants add
that nothing in Jefferies would have suggested to an artisan in
the semiconductor wafer polishing art that they should consider
dental polishing teachings as applicable to their needs.
From our review of the entire record, we are in agreement
with appellants, for the reasons which follow, that the teachings
and suggestions of Jefferies would not have suggested the
language of claim 1. As noted by appellants, Jefferies is
directed to a polishing device for residual orthodontic adhesive
removal for debonding orthodontic adhesive on a tooth and
polishing residual orthodontic adhesive from a tooth (col. 3,
lines 25-32). We find no teaching or suggestion in the
reference, and no teaching or suggestion has been pointed to by
the examiner, that would have taught or suggested using the
dental polishing tool of Jefferies for polishing semiconductor
wafers. The reference might have been sufficient if the
reference met all of the limitations of the claim and were
capable of polishing semiconductor wafers, and was used in a
rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102. However, to modify the
reference to provide the claimed hardness or density, there would
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007