Ex parte PIGNON - Page 2




              Appeal No. 1997-1015                                                                                       
              Application No. 08/168,713                                                                                 


                                                   BACKGROUND                                                            

                     The appellant's invention relates to a method for the processing of defective                       
              elements in a memory.  An understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of                  
              exemplary claim 1, which is reproduced below.                                                              
              1.   A method for replacing defective elements of a memory array further comprising                        
                   redundant elements, the memory array having undergone a test for the detection of                     
                   defective elements, wherein said method comprises the following steps:                                
              a) for each defective element detected:                                                                    
                   - searching for a first non-defective redundant element which is                                      
                       unassigned by testing of the redundant elements which have not                                    
                       been assigned, and then                                                                           
                   - assigning this first non-defective redundant element to the                                         
                       defective element; and thereafter                                                                 
              b) after the assigning of a redundant element to each defective element has been                           
                   achieved, replacing each defective element with the assigned redundant element.                       
                     The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the                     
              appealed claims are:                                                                                       
              Saito et al. (Saito)                     4,860,260                            Aug. 22, 1989                
              Choi et al. (Choi)                       5,299,161                            Mar. 29, 1994                
                                                                                    (Filed Nov. 18, 1991)                
                     Claims 1 and 3-15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable                        
              over Saito.  Claims 2 and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable                    
              over Saito in view of Choi.                                                                                



                                                           2                                                             





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007