Appeal No. 96-1536
Application 08/136,241
(Fed. Cir. 1983).
Finally, we recognize that the disclosure at column
6 describing the various embodiments of Figure 9 also includes
a step of first etching isolation trenches in the
semiconductor substrate. We also recognize that appellants'
claim 2 does not recite or require said first etching step.
Nevertheless, as a "comprising" claim, claim 2 does not
exclude such a step, or any other step not recited. In re
Baxter, 656 F.2d 679, 686, 210 USPQ 795, 802 (CCPA 1981).
Accordingly, we hold that appellants' claims 2 is
not rendered unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 112 and claims 1
through 3 are not unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 251. The
decision of the examiner is REVERSED.
REVERSED
WILLIAM F. SMITH )
Administrative
Patent Judge)
)
)
)
)
ANDREW H. METZ ) BOARD OF
PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007