Appeal No. 96-4080
Application 08/396,541
Appellant argues on pages 4 through 8 of the brief that
Huang, Bulucea and Sedra, together or individually, fail to
teach or suggest the claimed CMOS microelectronic device
comprising a hexagonal ANY element of a first conductivity
type, a hexagonal ALL element of a second conductivity type
which is opposite to said first conductivity type in which one
of the first through sixth edges of the ANY element is common
with one of the first through sixth edges of the ALL element.
We note that Appellant's independent claims 1 and 27 recite
these limitations.
Upon a careful review of Huang, Bulucea and Sedra, we
find that neither reference teaches a hexagonal ANY element of
a first conductivity type, a hexagonal ALL element of a second
conductivity type which is opposite to said first conductivity
type in which one of the first through sixth edges of the ANY
element is common with one of the first through sixth edges of
the ALL element as recited in Appellant's claims. We agree
with the Examiner that Huang teaches in column 6 a circuit
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007