Appeal No. 1995-3416
Application No. 08/127,707
Appellants maintain at page 5 of the principal brief that
"it is not seen wherein Kurakami et al. implants through the
gate oxide to form regions 210 and 210'." Appellants point
out that "Kurakami et al. clearly state at column 1 [sic, 5],
lines 37 to 40 'by making use of the gate electrode 203 as a
mask to form P+type regions 210 and 210' . . .'" (page 5 of
principal brief). However, the reference specifically
discloses that "[e]specially where ion implantation is carried
out, it may be effected through the gate insulator film
without removing the gate insulator film" (column 5, lines 45-
47, emphasis added).
Appellants also contend that "there would be no reason,
applying the Examiner's reasoning, to believe that the implant
would not travel through a sufficient amount of field oxide to
provide the higher concentration even beyond the bird's beak
region, thereby not being readable of the claims on appeal"
(page 5 of principal brief). First, the appealed claims do
not preclude a concentration gradient beneath the insulating
layer that diminishes in the direction beyond the bird's beak
region, yet still has a greater concentration beneath the
bird's beak region than beneath the remainder of the area
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007