Appeal No. 2001-1523
Application No. 08/731,236
Christenson does teach the steps of making bipolar transistors,
see answer at pages 7 and 8.
We are not persuaded by the examiner’s position. We,
instead, agree with appellant that Christenson merely teaches the
forming of a semiconductor integral circuit device and does not
even describe the concept of a semiconductor memory, let alone
the specific recited process. Furthermore, we also agree with
appellant that Christenson does not suggest concurrent making of
the contact hole metallization with the making of the bipolar
transistors. Therefore, we do not sustain the rejection of
claims 1 and 12 over Christenson.
Christenson and Komatsu
The examiner rejects claims 1 through 16 and 18 through 24
over this combination at pages 4 and 5 of the examiner’s answer.
After considering the appellant’s arguments (brief at page 10)
and the examiner’s response (answer at page 9), we conclude that
the rejection is not sustainable because Komatsu does not cure
the deficiency of Christenson as noted above.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007