Appeal No. 95-0634 Page 8
Application 07/962,322
reasonably read "throughout" into the claim because nothing else
in the claim requires such a reading. Paulsen, 30 F.3d at 1480,
31 USPQ2d at 1674. As we previously indicated, Yamazaki's two-
layer distribution meets the claim's requirement for an
overlapping, three-dimensional distribution.
3. Claim 2 contains a process limitation: the drain
region is formed by an oblique ion implantation. Process steps
in a product claim are limiting to the extent they further define
the structure of the claim. In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 697,
227 USPQ 964, 965-966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). As we indicated earlier,
however, the evidence of record does not support a finding that
Appellant's claimed structure would differ from Yamazaki's
inherent structure.
RULE 196(c) STATEMENT
At the hearing, we discussed with counsel the possibility of
an amendment under Rule 196(c). The addition of "throughout the
layer" after "distributed" would distinguish claim 2 from
Yamazaki. We did not identify an amendment that would solve the
drain-overlap problem, but one point of distinction would be
sufficient to overcome the rejection.
DECISION
The examiner's rejection of claim 2 is affirmed. Appellant
is entitled, however, to amend the claim as indicated, subject to
the provisions of Rule 196(c).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007