Appeal No. 1998-2483
Application No. 08/289,347
CCD are not existent in CMOS devices. (See brief at page 9.) Appellant argues that the
prior art to Pramanik and Odanaka does not teach the claim limitation of “forming an
image sensing section and a vertical transfer channel in a surface of the well wherein the
well is formed such that a peak of an impurity concentration is located at a deep position
from the substrate surface so that a relatively lower impurity concentration region is formed
on the surface thereby to reduce residual image and blooming of the image sensor.” (See
brief at page 9.) We agree with appellant that the prior art references to Pramanik and
Odanaka do not teach this limitation.
The examiner relies upon appellant’s statement in the specification that wells
are used in both CMOS and CCD’s. (See specification at page 1.) (See answer at page
4.) Appellant further states that the wells are formed in the prior art by selectively diffusing
impurities into the surface of a semiconductor substrate and the problems associated
therewith. (See specification at pages 1-2). The examiner relies upon appellant’s
statement of the problem with deep wells and that therefore, it would be obvious to use the
disclosed process used for CMOS for the CCD’s also. With the obviousness of the
process, the varied concentration of the impurities would have been “inherent” and that
residual image and blooming of the image sensor would be reduced. We disagree with
the examiner. This is merely speculation on the part of the
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007