Appeal No. 2005-0293
Application No. 09/727,139
Xiang et al. 6,211,044 B1 Apr. 03, 2001
(Xiang) (filed Apr. 12, 1999)
Nakajima 6,235,627 B1 May 22, 2001
(filed Jun. 24, 1998)
Claims 1 through 3, 9, 10, and 18 on appeal stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Xiang in view of
Nakajima. (Examiner’s answer mailed Aug. 25, 2003, paper 13,
pages 3-4.) In addition, claim 4 on appeal stands rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Xiang in view of
Nakajima and further in view of Then. (Id. at 4.) Also, claims
5 through 13, 16, and 19 through 22 on appeal stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Xiang in view of
Nakajima and further in view of Jeng. (Id. at 4-6.) Further,
claim 17 on appeal stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Xiang in view of Nakajima and further in view
of Ramachandran. (Id. at 6.)
We reverse these rejections.
Xiang, the principal prior art reference on which the
examiner’s rejections are based, discloses a method for
fabricating a semiconductor device having feature sizes that are
independent of lithographic limitations. (Column 2, lines 38-
40.) Xiang teaches that the method includes the steps of:
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007