Appeal No. 95-2859
Application 08/118,109
Figure 11 of Morris, the width of the formed resistor is defined
as that corresponding to the open area exposed or not covered by
the polysilicon mask. See column 7, lines 45-47. Thus, we agree
with the appellant that in Morris the resistor does not underlie
a “resistor masking conductor” as is called for by appellant’s
claim 1.
Alternatively, even if one were to regard the edges of the
p+ doped area in Morris which are underneath the polysilicon as
a part of the resistor, contrary to the express indication in
Morris, that is not sufficient to support a characterization
of the resistor element, in its role as an operative part, as
"underlying" the polysilicon mask. In Morris it is clear that
the resistor primarily occupies that open area exposed or
uncovered by the polysilicon mask. The p+ doped portions outside
of the exposed area do not meaningfully contribute to the
resistance of the resistor. To the extent that the examiner is
of the view that if any area making a contribution, however
small, to the overall resistance is under the mask, then the
resistor can be deemed as underlying the mask, we disagree.
That view is unreasonable and cannot be upheld.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007