Appeal 2007-1170
Application 10/971,698
have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). For the reasons given post, we
AFFIRM but denote our affirmance as a new ground of rejection.
The claimed invention relates to a sample evaporation container.
Although not so limited in the independent claims, the device is disclosed to
be used to evaporate an organic material and to deposit the vapor as a
relatively uniform film on an organic light emitting device ("OLED")
substrate in a vacuum chamber.
The Examiner rejected claims 1–18 as obvious over the combined
teachings of:
Freeman US 2003/0,168,013 A1 11 September 2003
Spahn US 6,237,529 B1 29 May 2001
Hanson US 3,446,936 27 May 1969
Shen US 2,793,609 28 May 1957
B. Findings of Fact
The 698 disclosure
1. Application 10/971,698 ("Specification") was filed on 25 October
2004, as a continuation-in-part of original application 10/093,739, which
was filed 8 March 2002, now abandoned.
2. According to the Specification, "a need exists for a thermal physical
vapor deposition apparatus that efficiently produces a uniform coating on a
variety of substrate materials." (Specification at 4:30–31.)
3. The Specification explains that prior solutions achieved more uniform
vapor deposition by, for example, eliminating spatter from the evaporating
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013