Appeal No. 2001-2660
Application 09/392,341
transistor. Such is not shown in appellants' prior art Figure 1
and is not discussed at specification page 2 associated with this
figure for the symbolic showing of the electrical inverter within
the one-half latch circuit 110 in prior art Figure 1. There is
no evidence before us that the symbolically shown inverter within
the latch circuit 110 of prior art Figure 1 corresponds to the
structure of a latch comprising a pMOSFET transistor 230 along
with its corresponding nMOSFET transistor 220 as in appellants'
disclosed Figure 2.
On the other hand, we sustain the rejection of independent
claim 9 on appeal. In contrast to the other independent claims
on appeal, this claim does not recite the CMOS inverter comprises
an nMOSFET transistor as just discussed. In fact, the nature of
the claimed domino gate and half-latch circuit in claim 9 is
consistent from an artisan's perspective of the normal operation
of appellants' prior art Figure 1 alone. As the examiner notes
at the top of page 7 of the answer, the claimed first voltage
corresponds to the input voltage applied to the domino gate 120
of appellants' prior art Figure 1 and the second voltage is the
output voltage of the output node out according to the normal
operation of the inverter circuit of this figure. In this sense
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007