Appeal No. 2003-0886
Application No. 09/466,845 Page 12
artisan would have provided the silicide contacts 46, 48 of
Kapoor in the memory structure of Chen. It is further argued
(id.) that there is no disclosure in the art for providing an LDD
structure in an MROM such as Chen.
From our review of Kapoor, we agree with appellant. Chen is
directed to a MOSFET with an improved LDD structure. As shown in
figure 6, Kapoor discloses silicide source/drain contacts 46, 48,
and titanium silicide contact 42 formed over gate electrode 12
(col. 5, lines 22-26). After spacers 30 are removed, (figure 7)
implantation of the lightly doped drains (LDD) occurs. However,
although Kapoor discloses the use of silicide source and drain
contacts and an LDD region, we find no teaching or suggestion
that would have motivated an artisan to provide the silicide
source/drain contacts in the double density MROM of Chen. We
agree with appellant that Chen has no need for the salicide
contacts or LDD of structure of Kapoor, and find that the
examiner has used appellant’s disclosure as a template to
reconstruct appellant's invention. “Obviousness may not be
established using hindsight or in view of the teachings or
suggestions of the inventor.” Para-Ordnance Mfg. v. SGS
Importers Int’l, 73 F.3d 1085, 1087, 37 USPQ2d 1237, 1239 (Fed.
Cir. 1995)(citing W.L. Gore & Assocs., Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007