Ex parte ALLEN et al. - Page 3




              Appeal No. 1997-0278                                                                                       
              Application No. 08/367,917                                                                                 



                     and                                                                                                 
                     a gate separated from the source and drain terminal regions by a layer of silicon                   
                     dioxide;                                                                                            
                     first conductive means connecting the drain terminal region of the first transistor                 
                     device to a high voltage node to be discharged, wherein the high voltage node has                   
                     a voltage of approximately 7-12 volts;                                                              
                     second conductive means connecting the gate of the first transistor device to a                     
                     biasing potential equal to an operating voltage of approximately 3 volts used in a                  
                     low voltage integrated circuit,                                                                     
                     third conductive means connecting the source terminal region of the second                          
                     transistor device to a ground potential; and                                                        
                     means for providing a positive input potential to the gate of the second transistor                 
                     device to enable the first and second transistor devices and discharge the high                     
                     voltage node without causing breakdown of the silicon dioxide layers or any junction                
                     of the first and the second transistor devices.                                                     
                     The prior art references of record relied upon by the Examiner in rejecting the                     
              appealed claims are:                                                                                       
              Lee et al. (Lee)                          4,922,311                    May 01, 1990                        
              Sato et al. (Sato)                        5,016,077                    May 14, 1991                        
              Yamamoto                                  5,239,197                    Aug 24, 1993                        
                     Claims 3, 5, 6 and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable                    
              over Sato.  Claims 1-6, 9, 10, 16 and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                                    
              § 103 as being unpatentable over Sato in view of Lee.  Claims 11 and 14 stand rejected                     
              under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Sato in view of Yamamoto.  Claims                         


                                                           3                                                             





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007