Appeal No. 97-4425
Application 08/619,418
L1 to the sense amplifier is formed "in the major surface" of the
semiconductor substrate. The examiner made no explanation as to
why it necessarily must be so. There is nothing to indicate that
this claimed feature is an inherent characteristic of Kohno. The
examiner has not articulated sufficient basis or pointed to
sufficient evidence to find that the unnamed conductive element
is formed "in the major surface" of the substrate. Note also
that from Figure 11 of Kohno, it does not appear that the unnamed
element extends in the same plane of the major surface of the
substrate. Accordingly, Kohno has not been shown to anticipate
claim 11 or the claims depending therefrom. A finding of
anticipation cannot be based on mere speculation or conjecture.
For the foregoing reasons, the rejection of claim 11 and
claims depending either directly or indirectly from claim 11
cannot be sustained.
Claim 19, on the other hand, does not require that the
conductive element be formed on the major surface of the
semiconductor substrate. Thus, the argument about the conductive
element being formed on the major surface of the semiconductor
substrate does not apply to claim 19.
With respect to independent claim 19, the appellants argue
that the claimed invention allows the sense amplifier control
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007