Appeal 2007-2134
Application 10/311,880
include a heating step as required by independent claim 1. Hence, we shall
also reverse the Examiner’s obviousness rejections on this record.
As set forth below, our disposition of the Examiner’s anticipation
rejections of the appealed apparatus claims is another matter.
§ 102(a) Rejection over Kuibira
Claims 3 and 5-11 are argued together as a group. Accordingly, we
select claim 3 as the representative claim for this claim grouping. Claim 4
will be considered separately to the extent it is separately argued in the
Briefs.
Representative rejected claim 3 requires a thin film forming apparatus
including gas supply means comprising a plurality of holes for ejecting gas
toward a substrate surface in a reaction chamber. Additionally, a heater is
incorporated at a substrate-side of the gas supply means. The heater is
capable of use for heating an organic metal gas to a temperature higher than
a thermal decomposition point but lower than a film forming temperature.
The Examiner has found that Kuibira describes a thin film forming
apparatus that includes both a gas supply means with holes (11) and a heater
(12) that correspond to Appellants’ claimed gas supply means and heater
(Answer 5 and 12; Kuibira, Figs. 1-14).
Appellants contend that “Kuibira does not teach controlling the
temperature of a heater in a manner required by the claims, including heating
an organic metal gas to a temperature higher than its thermal decomposition
temperature” (Br. 5). With regard to appealed claim 4, Appellants further
contend that Kuibira does not include a plurality of first ejection holes for
supplying organic metal gas and a plurality of second ejection holes for
supplying an oxidizing gas (Reply Br. 3).
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013