Appeal No. 97-2422
Application 07/939,720
is confirmed by appellant's recitation in dependent claim 21
which indicates that the passivation layer is such a material.
As to the consideration of the second rejection, including
independent claims 27 and 36, appellant's position with
respective to these is also misplaced. The analysis made with
respect to independent claim 1 and the combination of teachings
of Misawa and Sawatsubashi apply equally as well here. Our
analysis with respect to the first passivation layer has already
been made with respect to the passivation layer of independent
claim 1 and the collective teachings of Misawa and Sawatsubashi
at a minimum in addition to the teachings of Noguchi,
additionally relied upon by the examiner. The claimed second or
hydrogen-containing passivation layer of independent claims 27
and 36 is clearly met by the teachings in Noguchi.
Before discussing the features of this reference, it is
important to recognize that this second or hydrogen-containing
passivation layer is recited as being only “selectively disposed
on the first passivation layer.” This recitation is broad enough
to include the limited teaching of silicon nitride over the drive
circuits only of appellant's admitted prior art as indicated at
the top of specification page 2 with respect to the showing in
prior art Figure 21. Thus, the language of the claim may be
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007