Appeal No. 1998-1102
Application No. 08/761,883
With respect to independent claim 15, the Examiner
proposes to modify the semiconductor device structure of
Cederbaum which describes a polysilicon resistor in contact
with a glasseous material first insulating layer upon which a
second insulating layer is formed. As recognized by the
Examiner, the glasseous material insulating layer in Cederbaum
is not directly formed over the substrate, nor is it in
contact with the polysilicon resistor, as required by appealed
claim 15. To address this deficiency, the Examiner turns to
the semiconductor structure disclosed by Manning which, as
asserted by the Examiner, describes differing embodiments in
which a glass material insulator either contacts or is
isolated from the device substrate. In the Examiner’s view
(Answer, page 4):
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan
to combine the teachings of Manning with that of
Cederbaum in [sic] especially since Manning teaches
several embodiments where the BPSG may either
directly contact or not directly contact the
substrate. This is viewed as within design
considerations of any skilled artisan.
In response, Appellants assert that the Examiner has
failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness since no
motivation has been suggested for the Examiner’s proposed
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007