Ex parte Nogami

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Nov 14, 2001

08795197 (B.P.A.I. Nov. 14, 2001)

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written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 26
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte HIROSHI NOGAMI
__________
Appeal No. 1999-2117
Application No. 08/795,197
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before GARRIS, WARREN, and TIMM, Administrative Patent
Judges.
GARRIS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on an appeal from the final
rejection of claims 1-15 which are all of the claims in
the application.
The subject matter on appeal relates to a plasma
processing method using helicon wave excited plasma
comprising controlling dissociation of a processing gas
by setting an applied source power lower than a source
Appeal No. 1999-2117
Application No. 08/795,197
2
power corresponding to a discontinuous change of certain
parameters. Specifically, the aforementioned
discontinuous change relates to (1) a characteristic line
of electron density or saturated ion density as a
function of a power source or (2) a gradient of a
straight line approximately linearized to a
characteristic line of electron density or saturated ion
current density as a function of a source power. This
appealed subject matter is adequately illustrated by
independent claims 1 and 4 which read as follows:
1. A plasma processing method using helicon
wave excited plasma comprising the steps of:
controlling dissociation of a processing gas by
setting an applied source power lower than a source
power corresponding to a discontinuous change on a
characteristic line of electron density or saturated
ion current density as a function of a power source.
4. A plasma processing method using a helicon
wave excited plasma comprising the steps of:
controlling dissociation of a processing gas by
setting an applied source power lower than a source
power corresponding to a discontinuous change in a
gradient of a straight line approximately
linearized to a characteristic line of electron
density or saturated ion current density as a
function of a source power.
Appeal No. 1999-2117
Application No. 08/795,197
3
The references relied upon by the examiner as
evidence
of obviousness are:
Campbell et al. (Campbell) 5,421,891 Jun. 6,
1995
Sakai et al. (Sakai) 5,503,901 Apr. 2,
1996
Amorim et al. (Amorim), “High-density plasma mode of an
inductively coupled radio frequency discharge,” 9 J. Vac.
Sci. Technol. B, No. 2, pp. 362-65 (Am. Vacuum Society,
Mar./Apr. 1991).
Nakano et al. (Nakano), 61 Helicon wave excited plasmas,
No. 7, pp. 711-17 (1992).
Sugai, “Recent Development of Plasma Sources for Thin
Films Processing,” Proceedings of The 12th Symposium on
Ion Beam Technology Hosei University, pp. 15-20 (December
10-11, 1993).
All of the appealed claims stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over various
combinations
of the above-listed references.
We refer to the brief and to the answer for a
complete
exposition of the opposing viewpoints expressed by the
appellant and by the examiner concerning the above-noted
rejections.
OPINION
Appeal No. 1999-2117
Application No. 08/795,197
4
We cannot sustain the rejections advanced by the
examiner on this appeal.
Appeal No. 1999-2117
Application No. 08/795,197
5
We agree with the appellant’s fundamental position
that the applied references contain no teaching or
suggestion which would have motivated one having ordinary
skill in the art to combine these references in such a
manner as to result in a plasma processing method of the
type here-claimed wherein dissociation of a processing
gas is controlled by setting an applied source power
lower than a source power corresponding to the
discontinuous change defined by the independent claims on
appeal. Indeed, as correctly indicated by the appellant
in his brief, many of the references applied by the
examiner are not even concerned with the here-claimed
goal of controlling dissociation of a processing gas.
Moreover, none of the applied references contain any
teaching or suggestion for effecting this control by
setting an applied source power lower than a source power
corresponding to a discontinuous change of the type
claimed by the appellant. For example, while the Sakai
Patent relates to controlling dissociation in order to
enhance selectivity, this is effected by increasing flow
rate (e.g., see Figure 11 and the paragraph bridging
Appeal No. 1999-2117
Application No. 08/795,197
6
columns 14 and 15) rather than by setting an applied
source power lower than a source power corresponding to
the discontinuous change defined by the appealed
independent claims.
At most, the applied references reflect that the
prior art recognized the existence of the here-claimed
parameters involving a discontinuous change relating to a
characteristic line of electron density or saturated ion
current density as a function of a power source.
However, we perceive nothing and the examiner points to
nothing in these references which evinces a recognition
in the prior art that such a parameter would be effective
in achieving the appellant’s claimed goal of controlling
dissociation of a processing gas in a plasma processing
method using helicon wave excited plasma. Compare In re
Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 620, 195 USPQ 6, 8-9 (CCPA
1977).
Appeal No. 1999-2117
Application No. 08/795,197
7
For at least the reasons set forth above, we cannot
sustain the rejections before us on this appeal.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED

BRADLEY R. GARRIS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
CHARLES F. WARREN ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
CATHERINE TIMM )
Administrative Patent Judge )
BRG:hh
Appeal No. 1999-2117
Application No. 08/795,197
8
PLATON N. MANDROS
BURNS, DOANE, SWECKER & MATHIS
P.O. BOX 1404
ALEXANDRIA, VA 22313-1404