Ex parte BAUKUS et al. - Page 2



          Appeal No. 95-3779                                                          
          Application No. 08/191,063                                                  

          which have discernible layouts, which look alike to a reverse               
          engineer, but with dopant implant interconnections that are not             
          discernible by reverse engineering.                                         
               Representative independent claim 1 is reproduced as follows:           
               1. A secure integrated circuit (IC), comprising:                       
               a semiconductor substrate,                                             
               at least two logic circuits of different types formed in               
          said substrate with layouts which make said two logic circuits              
          look alike to a reverse engineer, each logic circuit having doped           
          IC elements, and                                                            
               an interconnect for at least one of said elements, said                
          interconnect comprising a dopant implant in said substrate of               
          like conductivity to said element, and providing an electrical              
          signal path to interconnect said element with another portion of            
          the IC, said dopant implant being substantially not discernible             
          by reverse engineering techniques.                                          
               The examiner relies on the following references:                       
          Koeppe              4,799,096           Jan. 17, 1989                       
          Kuwana              5,138,197           Aug. 11, 1992                       
                           (filed May 22, 1991)                                       
          Sawase (JP)         58-190064           Nov.  5, 1983                       
               Claims 1 through 15 and 21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.              
          '  112, first paragraph, under the written description provision            
          of that statutory section as being based on a specification that            
          allegedly fails to provide support for the invention as is now              
          claimed.                                                                    
               Claims 1 through 15 and 21 also stand rejected under                   
          35 U.S.C. '  103 as unpatentable over Kuwana.                               



                                          2                                           



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007