Appeal 2006-2571
Application 09/759,179
uniformly spaced triangular projections 77 with ridges forming stamping
surface 81.
We find Whitesides FIG. 10 is an atomic force microscope image of
projections 77 with stamping surface 81 of article 74 in FIG. 9f, showing
triangular projections and separating indentations of uniform width and
depth (Whitesides col. 10, ll. 39-49). Whitesides discloses that stamping
surface 81 can “include features having a lateral dimension of approximately
0.100 micron or less” as well as “small, isolated projections” that
“approximate a point,” all of which can be in “an ordered array” (id. col. 14,
ll. 28-66).
Contrary to the Examiner’s finding, article 74 of FIGs. 9f and 10 is
not stamp 20 of FIGs. 1a-d and 3a-c.
We find Biebuyck would have disclosed in FIG. 2D an elastomeric
stamp for use in a lithographic process which has deformable or elastic layer
24 for conformal contact and a second patterned layer 22 with rectangular
stamping surfaces and indentations with submicron features of non-uniform
width and depth (Biebuyck cols. 1 and 2, and col. 3, l. 28, to col. 4, l. 12).
We find Hawkins would have described in FIG. 6 the last step of a
fabrication process of a three dimensional structure from silicon substrate 12
in which the frontside surface 12A of the silicon substrate with mechanically
protective layer 16 and patterned masking layer 14 is anisotropically etched
to produce recesses 32 and remove layer 16, wherein vias 29 in layer 14 are
of different sizes to produce recesses of varying depths (Hawkins col. 5, ll.
1-23).
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013