Appeal No. 1999-1631
Application 08/733,586
second n-channel transistors horizontally aligned.
C. The reference and rejections
The examiner relies on the following U.S. patent:
Harari 4,132,904 Jan. 2,
1979
Claim 6 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 1 for
lacking written description support in the disclosure as filed
and for being based on a nonenabling disclosure.
Claims 2, 6, 7, and 14 stand rejected under § 112, ¶ 2
for indefiniteness.
Claims 1, 2, and 4-15 stand rejected under § 102 as
anticipated by Harari.
D. Appellant's burden of persuasion
Anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102 requires that each
element of the claim in issue be found, either expressly
described or under principles of inherency, in a single prior
art reference. In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 1326, 231 USPQ 136,
138 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Thus, appellant's burden on appeal with
respect to a rejection for anticipation is to identify at
least one claimed element that the examiner has failed to show
is disclosed or inherent in the reference. See Gechter v.
- 6 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007