Appeal No. 96-4052
Application 08/198,511
show contact between Ti and SiC. On this point we agree with
appellants. The examiner has not shown the claimed contact
structure on SiC. Nor has the examiner explained why one of
ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use the
contact structure of Steitz. Appellants use the contact
structure to provide stability to the contact (e.g.,
specification, page 13, lines 31-34), whereas Steitz discloses
that the plurality of metals enhances bonding (col. 3,
lines 41-46). Thus, we see no motivation to combine the
teachings of Steitz with Forrest. The rejection of claims 36
and 38 is reversed. Since claim 37 depends on claim 36, the
rejection of claim 37 is also reversed.
Claims 40-44 and 46
This group of claims is directed to masking. The
examiner states that "Kohl et al uses a mask for the light in
photo-electrochemical etching" (FR2; EA3) and concludes that
it would have been obvious "to use a light mask, as taught by
Kohl" (FR3; EA3).
Appellants argue that Kohl is directed to III-V and II-VI
semiconductors and that "[t]he Forrest et al. patent fails to
disclose a masking process for use with a SiC semiconducting
- 12 -
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007