Appeal 2007-1017
Application 10/204,997
1 26. Hasegawa describes every limitation of appealed claim 12
2 except it does not describe its polishing wheel as a “resin-
3 bonded abrasive wheel” having the elastic modulus and Shore
4 D hardness characteristics specified in appealed claim 12.
5 27. Applicant’s Specification states that “[t]he resin binder for the
6 resin-bonded abrasive wheel is preferably polyurethane.”
7 (Specification 6:11-12.)
8 28. Applicant’s Specification acknowledges that “[s]uitable resin-
9 bonded abrasive wheel [sic, wheels] are commercially
10 available, and/or can be made by techniques known in the art...”
11 (Specification 6:18-19.)
12 29. In support of this acknowledgement, incorporates by reference
13 two prior art references (Japanese Patent Laid-Open Publication
14 No. 294336/1990 and United States Patent 4,933,373 issued to
15 Moren on June 12, 1990) and also refers to “DLO WHEEL”
16 manufactured by Sumitomo Chemical 3M Co., Ltd.
17 (Specification 6:19-24.)
18 30. Roberts describes “polishing pads useful in the manufacture of
19 semiconductor devices or the like.” (Roberts 1:12-14.)
20 31. Roberts’s polishing pad is said to “comprise an advantageous
21 hydrophilic material having an innovative surface topography
22 and texture which generally improves polishing performance
23 (as well as the predictability of polishing performance).”
24 (Roberts 1:14-19.)
25 32. Roberts teaches that the polishing pad is useful for
26 “planarizing” (i.e., abrading) substrates, “particularly substrates
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013