Appeal No. 95-3455
Application 07/945,902
objection is poorly founded.
On page 7 of his Answer, the examiner explains the
rejection under Section 112 as founded on his position that:
the specification teaches that the only way to form
a floating gate electrode is to coat the etched
surface with an insulating layer. The examiner
contends that the specification does not disclose
forming a floating gate electrode without an
insulating layer and that the insulating layer
appears to be a critical feature of the invention.
Thus, it appears to be the examiner's position that because
step "(d)" of claim 6 recites making a floating gate only by
patterning by etching the polysilicon layer and tungsten
silicide layer without insulating the etched layer, step "(d)"
of claim 6, and claim 6 itself is not for the invention
described in appellants' original disclosure. Stated another
way, the examiner has interpreted appellants' disclosure as
requiring insulating after etching to make a gate electrode.
But this would seem to raise a question under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph, on the ground that appellants have failed to
present a claim for that which they believe to be their
invention or a question of enablement under the first
paragraph of 35 U.S.C.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007