Appeal No. 1997-0601
Application 08/161,878
with all regions and contacts on the same surface (as
contrasted to vertical structures, with regions and contacts
on both facing surfaces.) The usual reason for forming the
devices as lateral, rather than vertical, structures, is to
permit them to be integrated, that is, to form plural devices
on the same semiconductor, see the discussion of integrated
thyristor in col. 1 of Alonas.” As far as a three terminal
device with different size shorts is concerned, that is
already shown above to be obvious over Ohta alone.
We are convinced by the Examiner’s arguments. Alonas
does show the teachings of forming various thyristors on the
same surface in an integrated fashion, and these teachings of
Alonas would have made obvious to make Ohta's device on a
single surface, as claimed. Therefore, we also sustain the
rejection of claim 3 over Ohta and Alonas.
Claims 12 to 14
These claims are rejected as being obvious over Ohta and
Schovanec. The Examiner asserts [answer, page 5] that
“[o]bviously any thyristor device has to have a suitable
package, and it would have been obvious to use for Ohta a
-12-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007