Appeal No. 1999-0892
Application No. 08/630,128
USPQ 929, 933 (Fed. Cir. 1984). These showings by the Examiner
are an essential part of complying with the burden of presenting
a prima facie case of obviousness. Note In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d
1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
With respect to independent claims 1, 5, and 9, the
Examiner, as the basis for the obviousness rejection, proposes
to modify the FET structure disclosure of Onodera. As
recognized by the Examiner, Onodera, while describing an FET
utilizing a semi-insulating GaAs substrate, lacks a disclosure
of step doping and a recess formation of the gate electrode. To
address these deficiencies, the Examiner turns to Williams and
Willer for the teachings of step-doping and recess gate
formation, respectively. According to the Examiner (Answer,
pages 4 and 5), the skilled artisan would have been motivated
and found it obvious to modify Onodera with Williams and Willer
to achieve a uniform threshold voltage with a change in gate
length, as well as to provide a self-aligned gate.
In response, Appellants, in asserting a lack of
establishment by the Examiner of a prima facie case of
obviousness, do not attack the combinability of the applied
Onodera, Williams, and Willer references. Rather, Appellants
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007