Appeal 2007-1648
Application 10/631,098
SOI structures generally cannot be transferred to the floating bodies of SOI
structures because of the fundamental difference regarding the body
potential.”2 (Brief 10). On pages 10 and 11 of the Brief, Appellant also
asserts that the combination of the references do not teach a circuit control
network connected to said body, where said body is floating with respect to
the underlying substrate, because it is improper to modify Au.
The Examiner responds, on page 9 and 10 of the Answer, finding that
fabricating an SCR using SOI technology was known to the skilled artisan at
the time of the invention. The Examiner cites to two patents, Chen and
Chatterjee, as evidence that SCR’s can be manufactured using SOI
technology. Further, the Examiner states, on page 10 of the Answer:
[W]hen modified the circuit of Au by fabricated [sic] the circuit in
SOI environments, the body of transistor Q1 in Figure 4b of Au is still
being controlled by the network 40 which is similar as applicant's
invention that the body of the transistor is also controlled by a body
controlled network. Note that, when fabricated in SOI technology, the
circuit would have the advantages of low power and high speed.
ISSUE
Thus, the contentions present us with two issues.
The first issue before us is whether Appellant has shown that the
Examiner erred in finding that the circuit of Au could be implemented using
SOI technology.
The second issue before us is whether Appellant has shown that the
Examiner erred in finding that Au’s circuit modified to be implemented in
2 Appellant cites no evidence to support the assertion.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013