Appeal 2006-2988
Application 10/107,322
volume range from 73 to 46, 19 to 11 and 9 to 42 % by volume, respectively,
or if an etching gas used consists of chlorine, oxygen and hydrogen chloride
gases, the relative flow rates of these gases as expressed in terms of % by
volume range from 70 to 36, 18 to 9 and 13 to 55 % by volume, respectively,
and wherein the apparatus is so designed that when inputting the parameters
relating to the foregoing dry-etching conditions to said sequencer and then
starting the dry-etching process, the dry-etching is automatically carried out
under the foregoing dry-etching conditions.
The Examiner relies upon the following references as evidence of
obviousness:
Moriya et al. 5,494,522 Feb. 27, 1996
Hasegawa et al. 5,554,249 Sep. 10, 1996
Ke et al. 6,284,093 B1 Sep. 4, 2001
Appellants’ claimed invention is directed to an apparatus for dry-
etching a metal thin film comprising, inter alia, a source of etching gas
comprising chlorine, oxygen, and one of either hydrogen or hydrogen
chloride. The apparatus comprises a sequencer that receives input relating to
the conditions for the dry-etching process regarding the relative flow rates of
the three gases.
Appealed claim 19 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Moriya. Claim 20 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Moriya in view of Ke and Hasegawa.
We have thoroughly reviewed each of Appellants’ arguments for
patentability. However, we agree with the Examiner that the claimed subject
matter is unpatentable over the cited prior art. Accordingly, we will sustain
the Examiner’s rejections for essentially those reasons expressed in the
Answer, and we add the following primarily for emphasis.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007