Appeal No. 1999-2347
Application 08/892,560
not teach a metal conductive layer. (We note that Barber also
discloses a BPSG dielectric rather than a silicon dioxide layer
as claimed, but this difference is not argued and will not be
discussed.2) The Examiner finds that Erie and Kim teach
metallization interconnects and a silicon dioxide dielectric
layer, but do not teach a silicon nitride etch stop layer. The
Examiner concludes that it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art either: (1) to use metallization
interconnections in Barber because metallization interconnections
were conventional as taught in Erie and Kim (FR5; EA7); or,
alternatively, (2) to use silicon nitride as the etch stop layer
in Erie or Kim because silicon nitride was a conventional etch
stop material and etching can be done with a high degree of
selectivity as taught in Barber (FR5; EA7).
The rejection focuses on the obviousness of providing the
three layers of metal pad, silicon nitride, and silicon dioxide.
2 BPSG is a ternary (three component) oxide system
B203-P205-Si02 which includes silicon dioxide. See Wolf et al.,
Silicon Processing for the VLSI Era ) Volume 1: Process
Technology (Lattice Press 1986), pp. 189-190 (copy attached).
The reason the silicon dioxide layer is not argued may be because
Appellants consider silicon dioxide to cover BPSG. In any case,
however, arguments not raised are considered waived. Cf.
In re Wiechert, 370 F.2d 927, 936, 152 USPQ 247, 254 (CCPA 1967)
("This court has uniformly followed the sound rule that an issue
raised below which is not argued in this court, even if it has
been properly brought here by a reason of appeal, is regarded as
abandoned and will not be considered. It is our function as a
court to decide disputed issues, not to create them.").
- 17 -
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007