Appeal No. 2004-0581
Application No. 09/041,105
We refer to the brief and reply brief and to the answer for
a thorough discussion of the respective positions advocated by
the appellants and by the examiner concerning the rejections
before us.
OPINION
We will sustain each of the Section 103 rejections advanced
on this appeal for the reasons set forth below.
Although the examiner has based his rejection of appealed
independent claim 1 on 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), the examiner’s
unpatentability position clearly is based on his determination
that the Figure 6B semiconductor device of Yoshioka corresponds
identically to the structure defined in appealed claim 1. While
the examiner recognizes that the Yoshioka reference contains no
disclosure regarding the “fully depleted” function recited in the
last two lines of claim 1, it is apparent that the examiner
considers patentee’s Figure 6B device to be necessarily capable
of performing this claimed function since its structure
corresponds to the structure recited in claim 1. This position
is expressed by the examiner on page 10 of the answer in the
following manner:
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007