Ex Parte List et al - Page 3

                 Appeal 2007-0898                                                                                      
                 Application 09/962,786                                                                                

                        The Appellants' claimed invention is directed to a method of making                            
                 on-chip integrated circuit decoupling capacitors that, according to                                   
                 Appellants, may serve to prevent voltage drop on the power grid for high                              
                 surge current conditions.  The method entails, inter alia, forming a top                              
                 electrode barrier on the top electrode with the provision that the top                                
                 electrode comprises a material that is more electrically conductive than the                          
                 material of the top electrode.  For example, the top electrode barrier may be                         
                 Ta whereas the top electrode may be TaN.                                                              
                        Appealed claims 1, 2 and 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as                          
                 being unpatentable over Dalton in view of Shimada.  Claims 6, 8, and 10                               
                 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over the stated                         
                 combination of references further in view of Kirlin and Sze.  In addition,                            
                 claim 9 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over                           
                 Dalton in view of Shirmada, Kirlin, Sze, and Kang.                                                    
                        We have thoroughly reviewed the respective positions advanced by                               
                 Appellants and the Examiner.  In so doing, we find ourselves in agreement                             
                 with Appellants that the Examiner has failed to establish a prima facie case                          
                 of obviousness for the claimed method.  Accordingly, we will not sustain the                          
                 Examiner's rejections.                                                                                
                        The Examiner appreciates that Dalton fails to teach the presently                              
                 claimed top electrode barrier layer.  Hence, the Examiner applies Shimada                             
                 for evidencing the obviousness of including a top electrode barrier layer on                          
                 the top electrode of Dalton.  However, as emphasized by Appellants,                                   
                 Shimada fails to teach that the top electrode barrier material is one that is                         
                 more electrically conductive than the material of the top electrode, as                               


                                                          3                                                            

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013