Appeal 2007-2134
Application 10/311,880
(82, Fig. 5) are disclosed by Horie as being “surrounded by oxidizing gas at
a temperature of 500 °C and a substrate at 500 °C” (Answer 4).
Alternatively, the Examiner notes that Horie teaches that the organometallic
gas can be provided at a temperature up to and including the thermal
decomposition temperature (Answer 5). Based on this latter asserted
teaching, the Examiner contends that engineering tolerances would result in
at least a portion of the organometallic gas of Horie being supplied at a
temperature higher than the thermal decomposition temperature (id.).
Appellants maintain that the Examiner has not established that Horie
describes the contested heating step by the proposed theories.
Thus, the issue before us is: Has the Examiner furnished a prima facie
case of anticipation of claims 1, 2 and 15 based on the inherency and/or
engineering tolerances theories presented in the Answer. We answer this
question in the negative and reverse the Examiner’s anticipation rejection of
claims 1, 2 and 15 for substantially the reasons set forth by Appellants in the
Briefs.
As noted by Appellants, Horie teaches heating the organometallic gas
to a temperature less than or equal to the decomposition temperature to
prevent gas decomposition (Br. 4, Reply Br. 2; Horie, ¶¶ 54, 56, 61, 64, and
69). In the face of this disclosure, the Examiner has not fairly explained
how Horie inherently describes heating an inside of a gas supply means for
supplying an organometallic gas to a temperature higher than the
organometallic gas decomposition temperature. Also, note Horie’s use of
insulation (80, Fig. 5) between gas passageways. The Examiner’s
speculation concerning engineering tolerances and/or slight heat transfer to
the organo metallic gas that would allegedly increase the temperature thereof
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013