Appeal No. 95-2503
Application No. 08/024,883
claim 5 actually also includes the limitations of independent
claim 1 which are unobvious for previously argued reasons, we
have shown, supra, how the limitations of claim 1 are met by
the prior art. Since appellant is not arguing that the
teachings of Mori are not combinable with the other
references’ teachings, we will sustain the rejection of claim
5 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
With regard to claim 3, appellant specifically argues
that the claim recites “an elevated semiconductor source
region formed above said heavily doped portion of said
source.” Appellant argues (page 21-principal brief) that the
silicide regions 24 and 26 of Jain are not “semiconductor”
regions and therefore do not meet this claim limitation. The
examiner counters that silicide “has a band gap, and would
thus appear to be a semiconductor” (bottom of page 12 of the
principal answer). Thus, while we have no evidence one way or
the other, the examiner contends that the silicide regions of
Jain are semiconductors while appellant contends that they are
not. A semiconductor is an electronic conductor with
resistivity in the range between metals and insulators. The
silicide regions of Jain clearly conduct somewhat and,
13
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007