Appeal 2007-0127
Application 09/749,916
1 of less than 0.05 ohm-cm, the electrode having an RF driven surface on one
2 side which is exposed to plasma. (Answer, p. 7, ll. 16-21). Degner has been
3 found to describe a parallel plate electrode apparatus in which the upper
4 electrode is low contamination, a showerhead, with a thickness of from
5 about 0.1 cm to 2 cm, and bonded to a graphite backing ring. (Id., p. 8, ll. 3-
6 6). Accordingly, the Examiner correctly concluded that it would have been
7 obvious to modify Murai to include the showerhead of Degner to generate
8 uniform plasma, and yield an electrode of high purity. (Id., p. 8, ll. 7-22).
9 Claims 8-10 simply recite a reactor including the electrode of claim 1,
10 without adding material limitations defining the reactor. Accordingly, they
11 appear not to add any new limitations.
12 (III-A) Claims 1, 4, and 5
13 The Appellants argue that Degner and Murai have substantial
14 structural and functional differences, and combining them would
15 substantially change the principle of operation. (Br., p. 26, ll. 4-7). The
16 Appellants further urge that the claimed combination cannot change the
17 principle of operation of the primary reference or render the reference
18 inoperable for its intended purpose (Id., p. 27, ll. 3-5).
19 The test for obviousness involves consideration of what the combined
20 teachings, as opposed to the individual teachings, of the references would
21 have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. In re Young, 927 F.2d
22 588, 591, 18 USPQ2d 1089, 1091 (Fed. Cir. 1991); In re Keller, 642 F.2d
23 413, 425, 208 USPQ 871, 881 (CCPA 1981).
24 We observe that claims 1, 4, and 5 are drawn to electrodes, and Murai
25 is relied upon for teaching a resistivity range for electrodes. “[I]f a
31
Page: Previous 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013