Appeal No. 1999-1088
Application 08/689,867
Claims 5 through 24 and 27 through 30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103. As
evidence of obviousness, the examiner relies upon Mead in view of Furuya, MacElwee and
Tasaka.
Rather than repeat the positions of the appellants and the examiner, reference is
made to the brief and the answer for the respective details thereof.
OPINION
We reverse.
The essence of the disclosed and claimed invention is believed to be most
succinctly stated in the paragraph bridging pages 36 and 37 of the specification as filed
which states that "according to the present invention, the resistance value of respective
polysilicon resistors is held correctly by making potentials of respective resistors
themselves and electric conductors located thereabove and thereunder equal to each
other." The architecture to achieve these functional features is set forth at least in
disclosed Figures 1 and 2. This quoted summary of the disclosed invention is consistent
with the subject matter of independent claim 27 on appeal (and more awkwardly recited in
independent claim 30 on appeal) by the interconnectability of the claimed plurality of first
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007