Appeal No. 1996-4050
Application No. 08/410,375
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, i.e., the enablement of the disclosure. It is our
view that the disclosure in this application is enabling in a
manner which
complies the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112, and we will not
sustain the rejection of the claims on this ground.
The specification of a patent must teach those skilled in
the art how to make and use the full scope of the claimed
invention without undue experimentation.
The Examiner states:
The specification is objected to under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph, as non-enabling to make and
use the recited arrangements with “columnar regions”
and “taps” for the bipolar transistors, as discussed
previously and above.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
first paragraph, as not supported by [an] enabling
disclosure to make and use, as described previously
and above. (Emphasis added.) (Answer-page 4.)
Attempts to equate the recited “columnar
regions” with the entire P type substrate (which is
most definitely not a “columnar region”, as recited
in the claims) clearly is inappropriate.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007