Appeal No. 95-3675
Application No. 08/025,822
directly to control gate 28 which is situated directly above
channel region 25, considered to be the “random-access potential
setting means.” While a voltage applied to the word line in
Logie activates transistor 20, the “volatile control means” 25
therein does not maintain the voltage potential when control gate
electrode 28 is deactivated because “volatile control means” 25
is controlled in response to data on the word line supplied to
control gate electrode 28. Thus, Logie does not appear to teach
or suggest the claimed “switching means for effecting setting of
the potential of the volatile control means on a random access
basis.”
Thus, Logie does not appear to disclose or suggest either
the structure or the function set forth in independent claim 3.
Accordingly, the examiner’s decision rejecting claims 3 through
7, 9 and 10 under 35 U.S.C. ' 103 is reversed.
REVERSED
Errol A. Krass )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
Jameson Lee ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
Richard Torczon )
Administrative Patent Judge )
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007