Appeal 2006-2410
Application 09/983, 235
On December 13, 2004, an Information Disclosure Statement (IDS)
was filed in the present application. It is apparent from the record that the
Examiner has not yet considered the submitted IDS. The IDS should be
considered by the primary Examiner for compliance with 37 C.F.R. §§1.197
and 1.198, the Examiner should take appropriate action therewith. A
communication notifying the Applicants of the primary Examiner's decision
should be prepared and mailed. It is appropriate that the necessary
consideration and processing of the IDS occur prior to a rendering of a
decision in this appeal.
The subject matter of appealed claim 19 is directed to a deaerated
plating solution comprising copper, an acid wherein the solution comprises a
particular level of dissolved oxygen. The Examiner relies upon the
combined teachings of the Landau reference with any of the Winters,
Stickney, or Tamhaukar references to reject the appealed subject matter.
The Examiner has failed to indicate whether the portions of the cited
references describe or suggest the removal of oxygen to the extent required
by the claims would be reasonably expected by the prior art oxygen removal
methods. That is, the Examiner has not indicated, which portions of ,the
references disclose or suggest a plating solution which has an oxygen
content less than about 5 x 10-6 moles/liter as required by the claimed
invention. We note that the Examiner in the Answer, page 8 line 19, has
provided an incomplete statement with respect to theTamhaukar reference.
Consequently, it appears the Examiner has not provided a complete
statement regarding the descriptions of the Tamhaukar reference. 1 As such,
1 The Examiner should affirmatively state, whether the use of gas bubbling through a
copper plating solution, such as in the Tamhaukar reference (col. 3), necessarily provides
an oxygen level which meets the claim requirement.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013