Appeal No. 2000-0937
Application 08/959,620
According to appellant, the polysilicon layer 108 in Sudo is
disposed substantially below the surface of substrate 101 to make
room for the monosilicon plug 111 [brief, pages 7-10]. The
examiner responds that the lower electrode in Sudo is recessed
only slightly below the surface of the substrate just as in
appellant’s invention [answer, pages 5-7]. Appellant responds
that based on the dimensions disclosed by Sudo, the lower
electrode is substantially recessed when compared to the slight
recess of the claimed invention [reply brief].
Based on the record before us, we will sustain the
rejection of claims 1-9. The concept of the lower electrode of
the capacitor being recessed slightly below the surface of the
substrate appears nowhere in appellant’s specification. This
fact would suggest that the invention was not based on the
particular amount of recess of the lower electrode. In fact, the
specification makes only one reference to the amount of recess.
Specifically, the specification states that “[t]he amount that
the polysilicon within the containers 52a and 52b is recessed
should be carefully controlled because capacitance will be lost
as the first conductive layers or plates 54a and 54b become
smaller” [page 14]. Thus, the amount of recess would appear to
be only a function of the lower conductive layer being able to
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007