Appeal 2006-2989
Application 10/298,129
b) sorting the product of step a) using a step deck classifier
to obtain a controlled particle size distribution, and
c) removing impurities from the product of step a), step b),
or both.
In addition to the admitted prior art found in Appellants’ specification,
the Examiner relies upon the following references as evidence of
obviousness:
Griesshammer US 4,525,336 Jun. 25, 1985
Dumler US 5,165,548 Nov. 24, 1992
Journal of Electronics, 44, 46 (1978).
Appellants’ claimed invention is directed to a method of removing
impurities from comminuted polycrystalline silicon rods which uses a step
deck classifier to sort the silicon rods to obtain a controlled particle size
distribution. Appellants’ Specification, at page 11, states that the
polycrystalline silicon rods can be sorted manually or by use of apparatus
disclosed in US Patent 5,165,548, or by sorting apparatus disclosed in US
Patents 3,905,556, 5,064,076, and 5,791,493 (Spec. 11, last ¶). At page 12,
the Specification states “[a]lternatively, the polycrystalline silicon pieces
maybe sorted using an apparatus including a step deck classifier” (1st
sentence).
The appealed claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
follows:
(a) claims 1-5 over Griesshammer in view of Dumler,
(b) claims 6-12 over Griesshammer in view of Dumler,
(c) claims 13-19, 22 and 23 over Griesshammer in view of Dumler
and Journal of Electronics,
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007