Appeal No. 2000-0732
Application No. 08/741,799
appellants’ grouping of the claims at page 4 of the principal
brief, all the claims will stand or fall together.
Accordingly, we will concentrate our comments on independent
claim 1.
Claim 1 stands rejected as being anticipated by Kato. As
we understand it, it is the examiner’s position that Kato’s
semiconductor device is considered to have a semiconductor
body (comprising substrate 10 and epitaxial layers 13 in
combination), wherein the top surface of the semiconductor
body is the top surface of the epitaxial layers 13. Embedded
layer 11 is then considered the claimed “heavily-doped layer
beneath and separated from the top surface” and including a
first dopant since the N+ material of embedded layer 11 is
more heavily doped than the N material of the epitaxial layers
13. The examiner points to gate 22 in Figure 2(f) and to
source/drain regions 27 in Figure 2(g) of Kato and indicates
that the gate is formed over the semiconductor body and the
source/drain regions are formed within the semiconductor body.
Up to this point, the examiner’s analysis and application
of Kato to the instant claimed subject matter appears
reasonable.
4–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007