Appeal No. 96-4052
Application 08/198,511
material" (Br10). Appellants argue that Kohl involves
photoelectrochemical etching of p-type semiconductor
compounds, whereas claim 31 recites an n-type material (Br5).
Kohl discloses a photoelectrochemical etching process
where "[a] mask 27 may be used on the surface of the
semiconductor to define the area illuminated by radiation"
(col. 5, lines 54-56). Kohl discloses that "[t]he mask metal
may be used as the electrical contact to the semiconductor"
(col. 5, lines 59-60). The mask in Kohl would have suggested
the use of such a mask in Forrest since both are
photoelectrochemical etching processes. The difference in
conductivity types of the material being etched, p-type in
Kohl versus n-type in Forrest, does not negate the teaching of
using a mask on the material. It is also considered
notoriously well known in the semiconductor manufacturing art
to used mask layers to selectively control the area exposed.
The rejection of claims 40 and 41 is sustained.
Ultraviolet (UV) light is recited in claims 42 and 46.
These claims are not argued by appellants and we will not
address issues not argued in the brief. See 37 CFR
§ 1.192(c)(8)(iv) (errors must be addressed in brief). Cf.
- 13 -
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007