Appeal No. 95-3592
Application 08/109,203
heavily doped region having a resistance responsive to the
voltage between said first heavily doped region and said
second heavily doped region as recited in Appellants' claims.
We note that
Shirato teaches an equivalent electrical circuit to the
protection device of Figure 1(c). Shirato teaches in column
4,
lines 27-35, that resistor Rw shown in Figure 1(c) is the
resistance of element 22 shown in Figure 1(a) and resistor Rp
shown in Figure 1(c) is the resistance of element 26 shown in
Figure 1(a).
Appellants argue that Shirato's resistive means,
element 26 shown in Figure 1(a) and resistor Rw shown in
Figure 1(c), does not read on Appellants' claimed resistive
means. Appellants argue that because only a small amount of
current flows through element 26 with the majority of current
flowing through another resistance means, element 26 in Figure
1(a) and resistor Rp shown in Figure 1(c), Shirato's resistive
means, element 26, offers no practical benefit as a resistor.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007