Ex Parte Croce et al - Page 2



          Appeal No. 2006-0255                                                           
          Application No. 09/839,596                                                     

          The disclosed invention pertains to a lateral diffused                         
          metal oxide semiconductor (LDMOS) integrated device.                           
          Representative claim 5 is reproduced as follows:                               
               5.  A lateral diffused metal oxide semiconductor (LDMOS)                  
          integrated device comprising:                                                  
               a semiconductor substrate;                                                
               a drain region of a first conductivity type adjacent said                 
          semiconductor substrate and comprising a superficial buffer                    
          region being more heavily doped than adjacent portions of said                 
          drain region;                                                                  
               a body region completely surrounded on a bottom and sides                 
          thereof by said buffer region and having a second conductivity                 
          type; and                                                                      
               a source region in said body region and having the first                  
          conductivity type.                                                             
          The examiner relies on the following references:                               
          Contiero et al. (Contiero)    5,041,895          Aug. 20, 1991                 
          Huang                         5,665,988          Sep. 09, 1997                 
          Claim 5 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being                      
          anticipated by the disclosure of Huang.  Claims 6-11 and 14-18                 
          stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable                  
          over the teachings of Huang taken alone.  Claims 12 and 13 stand               
          rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over the               
          teachings of Huang in view of Contiero.                                        


                                           2                                             




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007