Appeal No. 1999-0848
Application No. 08/634,310
Thus, we sustain the Examiner’s 35 U.S.C. 102/103 rejection
based on Jang of representative claim 8.
The May Reference
With regard to the Examiner’s application of the May
reference against representative claim 8, we sustain this
35 U.S.C. § § 102/103 rejection of the Examiner as well. A
similar interpretation to that of Jang of the structure
illustrated in May’s Figure 1(b) is offered by the Examiner. We
agree with the Examiner that, contrary to Appellant’s
contention, at least a portion of the lower horizontal interface
of the p-n junction between the p-well and the n-substrate, when
viewed in cross section, terminates along a recessed portion of
the field oxide layer.
We also find Appellant’s reiterated arguments with respect
to the alleged lack in May of the claimed features of etched
formation of the field oxide region, the particular field oxide
reduced thickness range, and the enhanced breakdown voltage
function to be unpersuasive for all of the reasons discussed
previously with regard to Nakano.
The Maeda Reference
12
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007