Appeal No. 96-1584
Application 08/066,697
rejection of claims 20 and 21 stands or falls with the rejection
of claims 2 and 3, as applied to claim 24.
CLAIMS 22, 23, 4-6, 8, 9, 13-15, 17 and 18
After consideration of the positions and arguments presented
by both the examiner and the appellants, we have concluded that
the rejection of claims 22, 23, 4-6, 8, 9, 13-15, 17 and 18
should be sustained. We agree in general with the comments made
by the examiner; we add the following discussion for emphasis.
With respect to claim 22, appellant asserts to the effect
that the claim requires that the PN junction in the island region
be spaced apart from the sidewalls of the island region whereat
the dielectric material is formed, on the one hand, and that the
high-to-low impurity concentration junction intersect the
sidewalls of the island region and notes that neither embodiment
of Muramatsu relied on by the examiner, FIGS. 2 and 5g, includes
these two features. Still further, appellant argues to the
effect that Muramatsu does not specifically teach that its trench
material 20 is coupled to receive a bias voltage that is
insufficient to cause the avalanche-generation of electron-hole
pairs in the vicinity of the relatively high-to-low impurity
concentration junction.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007