Ex parte Kim

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Mar 28, 2002

08526828 (B.P.A.I. Mar. 28, 2002)

1
The opinion in support of the decision being entered today
was not written for publication and is not binding precedent
of the Board
Paper No. 15
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte TAE S. KIM
_____________
Appeal No. 1998-2619
Application 08/526,828
______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before PAK, TIMM and DELMENDO, Administrative Patent Judges.
PAK, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134
from the examiner’s final rejection of claims 1 through 14
which are all of the claims pending in the above-identified
application.
Claims 1 and 10 are representative of the subject matter
on appeal and read as follows:
Appeal No. 1998-2619
Application No. 08/526,828
2
1. A method for adjusting gas flow in a flow-flange
reactor to achieve a desired thickness profile, comprising the
steps of:
establishing a target thickness profile;
determining a first set of optimum input-flow ratios in
response to said target thickness profile, based upon a first
plurality of sample thickness profiles and a first plurality
of sets of sample input-flow ratios, each of said sample
thickness profiles corresponding to one set of said first
plurality of sets of sample input-flow ratios;
calculating from said input-flow ratios a gas flow for
each of a plurality of gases supplied to said reactor; and
open-loop control adjusting gas flow to said reactor for
each of said plurality of gases to produce said calculated gas
flow.
10. A method for determining an input-flow ratio in a
flow-flange reactor to achieve a desired thickness profile on
a digital computer, comprising the steps of:
establishing a target thickness profile and storing data
representing said target thickness profile in memory;
calculating a first set of optimum input-flow ratios in
response to said target thickness profile, said input-flow
ratios being usable to calculate each of a plurality of gas
flows to said reactor for producing said desired thickness
profile in an open-loop control process, said input-flow
ratios being based upon data stored in said memory, said data
representing a first plurality of sample thickness profiles
and a first plurality of sets of sample input-flow ratios,
each of said sample thickness profiles corresponding to one
set of said first plurality of sets of sample input-flow
Appeal No. 1998-2619
Application No. 08/526,828
The examiner has withdrawn the Section 112 rejection set1
forth in the final Office action dated May 5, 1997 (Paper No.
8). See Answer, page 3.
3
ratios; and
storing data representing said first set of optimum
input-flow ratios in said memory.
The prior art references relied upon by the examiner are:
Suzuki et al. (Suzuki) 4,579,623 Apr. 1,
1986
Manada et al. (Manada) 5,463,977 Nov. 7,
1995
Technical Update Book for the GS/3000 Series (Technical
Update), by EMC RE TurboDisc, December 1991.
Claims 1 through 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as unpatentable over Suzuki in view of Technical Update and
Manada. 1
We reverse.
Under 35 U.S.C. § 103, “the examiner bears the initial
burden, on review of the prior art or on any other ground, of
presenting a prima facie case of unpatentability.” In re
Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir.
1992). In other words, the examiner must provide a sufficient
Appeal No. 1998-2619
Application No. 08/526,828
4
factual basis to support his Section 103 rejection. In re
Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1017, 154 USPQ 173, 177-78 (CCPA 1967).
To carry his burden of proof, the examiner relies on the
combined disclosures of Suzuki, Technical Update and Manada.
However, for the reasons well articulated by appellant at
pages 5 and 6 of the Brief, we find that the examiner has not
provided sufficient factual evidence to demonstrate that the
claimed subject matter as a whole would have been obvious to
one of ordinary skill in the art within the meaning of 35
U.S.C. § 103. We only wish to emphasize that the examiner has
not adequately explained how and why one of ordinary skill in
the art would have been led to employ the closed-loop control
process variables for epitaxially growing a chemical-compound
crystal described in Manada in the pre-programmed control
process for plasma etching and deposition for semi-conductor
integrated circuits described in Suzuki (e.g., Figure 7) to
arrive at the claimed open-loop control process involving
specific process control variables.
Appeal No. 1998-2619
Application No. 08/526,828
5
Accordingly, we reverse the examiner’s decision rejecting
all the appealed claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
REVERSED
Chung K. Pak )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
Catherine Timm ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
Romulo H. Delmendo )
Administrative Patent Judge )
CKP:cam
William B. Kempler
Texas Instruments Incorporated
P. O. Box 655474 M/S 219
Dallas, TX 75265