The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not
written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 18
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte MADHUKAR B. VORA
_____________
Appeal No. 1999-1940
Application No. 08/654,760
______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before LALL, GROSS, and BLANKENSHIP, Administrative Patent Judges
LALL, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the
Examiner's final rejection1 of claims 1 to 5, which constitute
all of the claims in this application.
The invention is directed to a vertically-integrated EEPROM
cell which has two features which distinguish over the prior
art. The first principal structural difference is the use of a
1An amendment, together with a declaration, were filed after the final
rejection, see papers 10 and 8 respectively, however, the examiner did not
approve the entry of the amendment but did approve the entry of the
declaration. See paper no. 13.
1
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007