Ex parte Sorokov

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Oct 31, 2001

08388425 (B.P.A.I. Oct. 31, 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publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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 BORIS SOROKOV
and
ILYA KHANUKOV
_____________
Appeal No. 1999-0908
Application No. 08/388,425
______________
HEARD: OCTOBER 11, 2001
_______________
Before PAK, WARREN, and OWENS, 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 refusal to allow claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 21, 23
through 25 and 27 through 31, which are all of the claims
pending in the above-identified application.
Claim 1 is representative of the subject matter on appeal
and reads as follows:
Appeal No. 1999-0908
Application No. 08/388,425
2
1. A method of depositing a coating onto a
substrate by means of a sputtering process, wherein a
flow discharge plasma is generated in a diode sputtering
source between a cathode, provided with an outwardly
facing surface constituting a target, and an anode, and
wherein generation of said plasma results in ion
bombardment of said target followed by ejection of target
material and movement of said target material toward said
substrate with subsequent formation of a coating
deposited onto said substrate;
said method comprising the steps of:
i) introducing a substrate into a process chamber so
as to expose a surface of said substrate to flux of the
sputtered target material;
ii) establishing a magnetic field within said
chamber;
iii) applying, to said cathode, electrical power
sufficient for establishing a glow discharge;
iv) establishing, within said chamber, an atmosphere
of ionizable fluid continuously fed thereinto and
evacuated therefrom so as to establish a uniform working
pressure within said chamber; and
v) maintaining, between said anode and said cathode,
a self-sustained glow discharge accompanied by generation
of a plasma consisting of ions of an ionizable fluid for
bombarding said target and emitting target material
toward said substrate;
wherein said diode sputtering source is a high
voltage discharge diode source with an applied arbitrary,
directed, stationary magnetic field, and wherein said
field is varied in such a manner that there is
established a gradient of magnetic field strength
Appeal No. 1999-0908
Application No. 08/388,425
3
directed from said anode to said target, and wherein the
magnetic strength of said magnetic field within a first
region situated adjacent to said anode exceeds a magnetic
field strength within a second region situated adjacent
to said target by at least 25%, and said
Appeal No. 1999-0908
Application No. 08/388,425
4
second region has a configuration of a layer, said layer
extending above and along said outwardly facing target
surface, and wherein said magnetic field is configured so
as to localize and shift said plasma away from said
substrate.
In support of his rejections, the examiner relies on the
following prior art references:
Knowles et al. (Knowles) 3,669,860
Jun. 13, 1972
Boucher et al. (Boucher) 4,094,764
Jun. 13, 1978
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 21, 23 through 25 and 27 through 31
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over the
combined disclosures of Boucher and Knowles.
We reverse the aforementioned § 103 rejection for
essentially those reasons expressed in the Brief. We only add
that neither Boucher nor Knowles alone, or in combination,
would have suggested using the claimed gradient of magnetic
field strength directed from an anode to a target, wherein
“the magnetic strength of said magnetic field within a first
region situated adjacent to said anode exceeds a magnetic
field strength within a second region situated adjacent to
said target by at least 25% . . . . ” As correctly pointed
out by appellants, both Boucher and Knowles do not teach or
Appeal No. 1999-0908
Application No. 08/388,425
5
suggest the importance of varying the magnetic field gradient,
much less varying it in the claimed manner, i.e., providing
specific magnetic field strengths at the particular locations
of a sputtering coating system.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
CHUNG K. PAK )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
CHARLES F. WARREN ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
TERRY J. OWENS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
CKP:hh
Appeal No. 1999-0908
Application No. 08/388,425
6
WIGMAN, COHEN, LEITNER & MYERS, P.C.
THE FARRAGUT BLDG.
900 17 STREET, N.W.TH
1000 10 FLOOR TH
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006