Ex Parte LELL - Page 2




          Appeal No. 2001-0726                                                        
          Application 09/272,969                                                      


          The disclosed invention pertains to a semiconductor                         
          configuration, particularly an optical transmitter and receiver             
          configuration formed on a single semiconductor substrate.                   
          Representative claim 15 is reproduced as follows:                           
               15. A semiconductor configuration having at least two                  
          semiconductor elements, comprising:                                         
               a semiconductor substrate having a top side;                           
               at least two differently doped surface regions embodied in             
          said top side; and                                                          
               at least two active layer structures each having a plurality           
          of layers disposed on different ones of said at least two                   
          differently doped surface regions and each defining a                       
          semiconductor element, each of said plurality of layers having a            
          lowermost electrically conductive layer disposed toward said                
          semiconductor substrate and electrically separated from one                 
          another.                                                                    
          The examiner relies on the following references:                            
          Hara et al. (Hara)            4,794,609          Dec. 27, 1988              
          Chinen                        5,281,829          Jan. 25, 1994              
          Claims 15 and 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)                    
          as being anticipated by the disclosure of Chinen.  Claims 17 and            
          18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103.  As evidence of                    
          obviousness the examiner offers Chinen in view of Hara.                     
          Rather than repeat the arguments of appellant or the                        
          examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answer for the            
          respective details thereof.                                                 

                                         -2-                                          





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007