Appeal No. 96-1584
Application 08/066,697
We are of the opinion that the subject matter of claim 22,
and thus that of claims 23, 4-6, 8, 9, 13-15, 17 and 18, would
have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time
the invention was made. As noted by the examiner, in FIG. 9,
which is analogous to appellant's FIG. 1, Piotrowski shows a
high-to-low impurity concentration junction intersecting an
insulating material at the sidewalls of the semiconductor island
region and a PN junction below contact 156 in the island region
spaced apart from the sidewalls. To extend the corresponding
junction to the sidewalls in the embodiment of FIG. 2 of
Muramatsu or, in the alternative, to space the PN junction formed
at P-type region 31 from the sidewalls of the semiconductor
island region would have been obvious in view of the
aforementioned teachings of Piotrowski. The suggestion to
combine the teachings of the references flows from the fact that
each concerns semiconductor structure having surface island
regions formed by isolation walls. Appellant does not assert
unexpected results from extending the aforementioned junction of
Muramatsu's FIG. 2 embodiment or spacing region 31 of the
reference's FIG. 5g embodiment or even argue against the
obviousness of combining Muramatsu and Piotrowski with respect to
this subject matter. Appellant merely states to the effect that
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007