Appeal 2007-2532
Application 10/608,791
¶ 39.) Krieger describes Figure 5 in relevant part as having an active layer
of "polystirol" and a passive layer of copper or silver [c]halcogenide.
(Krieger at 4, ¶ 57.) The Examiner argues that the Krieger memory cells
"inherently have all of the memory-state properties of the claims because the
structure and materials are the same as those of the claimed invention"
(Answer at 5–6); but the Examiner cites no specific supporting disclosure in
the specification. Our review shows that there is no apparent description of
a dopant in the memory cell shown in Figure 5, much less a dopant that is
active in the first, high resistance state, and inactive in the second, low
resistance state.
Ordinarily, this would be the end of the inquiry. However, Krieger, in
paragraph 19, cited by the Examiner and quoted supra, describes memory
cells that can be switched from one state to another. A typical memory
structure, shown in Figure 1, has an active layer based on organic polymers
with dopants that allow creation of a "structure capable of changing the
active layer resistance and . . . forming high conductivity areas or lines in the
active layer under external electric and/or light radiation effect on the
memory cell." (FF 19 and 20; Krieger at 2, ¶ 19.) Thus, Krieger describes a
doped organic polymer-based memory element that can be switched from a
low conductivity state (dopant inactive) to a high conductivity state (dopant
active) in response to a stimulus, e.g., a shift in voltage or illumination. On
this record, we therefore AFFIRM the Examiner's rejection of claim 4.
D. Summary
In view of the record and the foregoing discussion, it is:
ORDERED that the Examiner's rejection of claim 1 under 35
U.S.C. § 102(e) as anticipated by Stasiak is AFFIRMED.
18
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013