Appeal 2007-1893
Application 10/946,753
“Orientation” is defined, in pertinent part, as “a relative position.”10
As shown in Figs. 5A-7D, not only does the structure of the aperture itself
influence, at least in part, the relative positions of the nanostructures, the
disposition of the catalyst with respect to the aperture also has such an
influence. Furthermore, the vertical growth preventing layer in conjunction
with the aperture and catalyst likewise influences growth in the horizontal
direction – a direction that fully meets a “relative position” or orientation. In
sum, the aperture 16 and its associated structure is a substantial factor in
influencing the relative positions, or orientations, of the nanostructures. The
aperture therefore controls, at least in part, the orientation of the
nanostructures as claimed. For this reason alone, claim 1 is fully met by
Shin.
Shin also fully meets claim 1 for an additional reason: the aperture
not only controls the orientation of the nanostructures, but also their
length—at least in part. As the Examiner indicates, the nanostructures’
length is dictated primarily by the size of the aperture.11 In this regard,
Figures 6A-7D clearly show that the nanostructures span the entire extent of
the aperture (i.e., the diameter of a circular aperture as shown in Figs. 6A-7C
or the width of a polygonal aperture in Fig. 7D).
Even if we assume, without deciding, that one nanotube could
somehow grow faster than the other as Appellants argue (and therefore meet
at a point not precisely at the center of the aperture), the limitation regarding
10 The Compact Oxford English Dictionary of Current English, available at
http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/orientation?view=uk (last visited
Aug. 23, 2007).
11 See Answer, at 14 (“[T]he nanotubes can only be as long as the opening
will allow.”).
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013