Ex parte SEABAUGH - Page 2




          Appeal No. 1998-1099                                                        
          Application No. 08/263,180                                                  

          all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening                
          claims.                                                                     
               The disclosed invention relates to a hot carrier                       
          transistor.                                                                 
               Claim 79 is the only independent claim on appeal, and it               
          reads as follows:                                                           
               79. A hot carrier transistor, comprising:                              
                    (a) an emitter;                                                   
                    (b) a base;                                                       
                    (c) a collector, said collector forming a                         
          heterojunction with said base; and                                          
                    (d) an injector connected between said emitter and                
          said      base, said injector including tunneling barriers                  
          with      bandgap larger than the bandgaps of said emitter and              
          of said base and also including a quantum well between said                 
               tunneling barriers with a portion having a bandgap                     
          smaller than the bandgaps of said emitter and of said base.                 
               The reference relied on by the examiner is:                            
          Yokoyama                 4,712,121                     Dec. 8,              
          1987                                                                        
               Claims 79 and 81 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)               
          as being anticipated by Yokoyama or, in the alternative, under              
          35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Yokoyama.                        
               Reference is made to the brief and the answer for the                  
          respective positions of the appellant and the examiner.                     
                                          2                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007