Appeal No. 97-0614
Application No. 08/212,465
The rejection must fail in that the examiner’s
assertion, that the reference has plural memory planes on a single
semiconductor substrate because two or more memory arrays of
Pinkham may be considered as one memory plane, is not accompanied
by an explanation of why this is true. The examiner simply has
provided no justification for his conclusion that two or more
memory arrays of Pinkham may be considered as one memory plane,
and thus, that the reference teaches plural memory planes
fabricated on a single semiconductor substrate. It has not been
established by any evidence what broadly constitutes a memory
plane, nor has it been shown that two or more of Pinkham’s memory
arrays satisfy the definition of such a plane. Anticipation
requires that all the elements of the claimed invention be
described in a single reference. In re Spada, 911 F.2d
705, 708, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1657 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
REVERSED
STANLEY M. URYNOWICZ, Jr. )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007