Appeal No. 1997-0513
Application 08/367,644
See RCA Corp. v. Applied Digital Data Sys., Inc., 730 F.2d
1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
Claims 19 through 21
These claims are rejected as being anticipated by
Ishijima or Gotou.
There is no dispute as to what Ishijima or Gotou
discloses. The crux of the issue is the interpretation of the
claims. We consider independent claim 19. The claim recites
the limitation "a conductive layer spaced from and overlying
said gates, said layer having an opening over said doped
region and extending over a portion of each of said gates."
Appellant argues [brief,
page 3] that neither Ishijima nor Gotou shows a conductive
layer which has an opening which overlies the doped region and
extends over a portion of each of the gates. The Examiner
vehemently disagrees with this interpretation of the claimed
recitation. The Examiner asserts [answer, pages 5 to 7] that
the above claimed limitation “does not require 'the opening in
the conductive layer to extend over the gates'" [id. 5].
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007