Appeal No. 2000-0260
Application No. 08/675,865
chart of Figure 7 clearly indicates the relationship of penetrating
substrate depth of arsenic and phosphorus ions to implantation
energy. A comparison of this chart with the implantation energy
ranges in the originally filed disclosure, and which also appear in
originally filed claims 3, 4, and 15, provide support for the
penetration depth relationship of arsenic and phosphorus that
appears in appealed independent claims 1 and 12.
In view of the above discussion, it is our opinion, under the
factual situation presented in the present case, that Appellants
have satisfied the statutory written description requirement
because they were clearly in possession of the invention at the
time of filing of the application. Therefore, we do not sustain
the rejection of claims 1, 3-10, and 12-17 under the first
paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112.
We consider next the Examiner’s rejection of claims 1, 5, 7,
8, 10, 12, 16, and 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated
by Lee. Anticipation is established only when a single prior art
reference discloses, expressly or under the principles of
inherency, each and every element of a claimed invention as well as
disclosing structure which is capable of performing the recited
functional limitations. RCA Corp. v. Applied Digital Data Systems,
Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir.); cert.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007