Appeal 2007-0127
Application 09/749,916
1 modified by Murai of the claimed diameter as Saito teaches that the
2 dimension is suitable for a gas outlet of a showerhead electrode. (Answer, p.
3 6, ll. 10-16).
4 The Appellants urge that the claimed combination of Degner, Murai
5 and Saito would have led away from the claimed subject matter of claim 3.
6 (Br., p. 21, ll. 18-19). The Appellants base this argument on Saito’s
7 description of 0.5 mm apertures (Saito, col., ll. 15-16) as being within a 5
8 mm thick disc. (Id., l. 18). The Appellants urge that, as 5 mm is 0.20
9 inches, it is “significantly thinner” than the electrode of 0.25 inches as
10 claimed. (Br., p. 21, l. 21).
11 This argument likewise is without persuasive merit.
12 First, each of the claims recite “about 0.25 inch to 0.5 inch.”
13 Asserting that “0.20” is “significantly” different from “about 0.25” without
14 persuasive evidence of a relevant difference in some critical characteristic is
15 merely an exercise in numerology. Secondly, the Appellants have not
16 indicated how one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led away
17 from the claimed range.
18 Finally, the appellants have made no argument whatsoever to claim
19 27, which requires the claim limitation of ultrasonically drilled holes.
20 Accordingly, we are not persuaded of error.
21 (IIB) Claims 21, 25, 31, and 37
22 Claim 21 covers low-resistivity showerhead electrodes with “the gas
23 outlets having the diameter of about 0.025 inch to 0.030 inch” (emphasis
24 added).
28
Page: Previous 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013