Ex parte TSUJI - Page 12




          Appeal No. 95-3885                                                          
          Application 08/172,051                                                      



                    Upon reviewing Muller, Shockley and Gosch, we fail                
          to find a teaching or a suggestion of placing the resistive                 
          layer within the semiconductor device which is below the pn                 
          junction and between the substrate and the pn junction.  As                 
          pointed out above, Shockley's teaching would lead those                     
          skilled in the art to place the resistive layer on the surface              
          of the device so as to avoid further heating.                               
                    The Federal Circuit states that "[t]he mere fact                  
          that the prior art may be modified in the manner suggested by               
          the Examiner does not make the modification obvious unless the              
          prior art suggested the desirability of the modification."  In              
          re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1266 n.14, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1783-84                
          n.14 (Fed. Cir. 1992), citing In re Gordon, 733 F.2d 900, 902,              
          221 USPQ 1125, 1127 (Fed. Cir. 1984).  "Obviousness may not be              
          established using hindsight or in view of the teachings or                  
          suggestions of the inventor."  Para-Ordnance, 73 F.3d at 1087,              
          37 USPQ2d at 1239, citing W. L. Gore & Assocs., 721 F.2d at                 
          1551, 1553, 220 USPQ at 311, 312-13.                                        




                                          12                                          





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007