Appeal No. 1995-3416
Application No. 08/127,707
In the present case, we agree with the examiner that it
is reasonable to conclude that regions 210 and 210' of
Kurakami, which are described as having a higher concentration
of P-type impurity than silicon substrate underlying field
oxide layer 207, extend to some degree beneath the bird's beak
region of oxide 207, at least to the non-specified degree
claimed. Indeed, the very words of Kurakami attest to the
reasonableness of this conclusion. In relevant part, Kurakami
expressly teaches that the width C of channel region 202 is
not affected even if a protrusion 212 of region 210 extends
under the oxide film 207 (column 5, lines 56-59). In our
view, Figure 2B and the accompanying disclosure of Kurakami
fairly establishes a prima facie case of anticipation that
properly shifts to appellants the burden of proving that the
dopant implantation of Kurakami does not necessarily result in
some concentration of dopant beneath the bird's beak region
being greater than the concentration beneath the remaining
portion of the substrate beneath the insulating layer.
However, appellants have presented no such objective evidence
to rebut the prima facie case of anticipation.
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007