Ex parte FORD et al. - Page 2




          Appeal No. 95-2576                                                          
          Application 07/962,952                                                      


               The invention relates to a method for testing an integrated            
          circuit device to determine if latent defects exist within the              
          device.  Appellants disclose on page 3 of the specification that            
          the method includes applying a voltage to the integrated circuit            
          and controlling the voltage being applied to the integrated                 
          circuit device as a function of the channel lengths.                        
               The independent claim 1 is reproduced as follows:                      
               1.  A method for testing an integrated circuit device, said            
          integrated circuit device having a plurality of electronic                  
          devices, each of said plurality of electronic devices having a              
          channel of a predetermined length, said testing method comprising           
          the steps of:                                                               
               applying a voltage to said integrated circuit device;                  
               and                                                                    
               controlling said voltage being applied to said                         
               integrated circuit device as a function of channel                     
               lengths.                                                               
               The Examiner relies on the following references:                       
          Groves et al.            4,588,945           May  13, 1986                  
          Schinabeck               4,637,020           Jan. 13, 1987                  
               Claims 3, 6, 8, 9 and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                
          § 112, second paragraph, for failing to particularly point out              
          and distinctly claim the subject matter which Appellants regard             
          as the invention.  Claims 1 through 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 stand                
          rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Groves.           
          Claims 5, 7, 9 and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as               

                                          2                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007