The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written for
publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte JU-HYUNG LEE, TROY KIM, SOOVO SEN,
JUAN CARLOS ROCHA-ALVAREZ, LUN TSUEL,
ANNAMALAI LAKSHMANAM, MAOSHENG ZHAO,
INNA SHMURUN, and SHANKAR VENKATARAMAN
____________
Appeal No. 2006-1871
Application No. 10/245,442
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before KIMLIN, KRATZ and GAUDETTE, Administrative Patent Judges.
KRATZ, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal from the examiner's final
rejection of claims 13, 15, 21, 23, 29, and 31, which are all of
the claims pending in this application. We have jurisdiction pursuant to
35 U.S.C. § 134.
BACKGROUND
Appellants' invention relates to a method for cleaning a
chemical vapor deposition chamber. An understanding of the
invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 29,
which is reproduced below.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007