Appeal No. 1998-0129 Page 18
Application No. 08/438,062
statement that Ba Sr TiO is non-ferromagnetic at normal
0.7 0.3 3
integrated circuit operating temperatures, we conclude that
although the formulation of BST is a result effective
variable, and the prior art suggests a capacitor having a BST
layer on a gallium arsenide substrate and a barrier diffusion
layer, that one of ordinary skill in the art with the
disclosures of Miller and Koyama before him/her would not have
been taught to have provided non-ferromagnetic formulation
Ba Sr TiO . In considering what the teachings of the prior
0.70.3 3
art references as a whole would have suggested to one of
ordinary skill in the art, we find no suggestion that one of
ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to have
looked to a different formulation of BST than the formulation
disclosed by Koyama. Accordingly, we find that the examiner
has failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness of
claim 4 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Miller in
view of Koyama. Accordingly, the rejection of claim 4 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Miller in view of Koyama
is reversed.
We reach a different conclusion, however, as to what the
teachings of Miller and McMillan, considered as a whole, would
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007