Appeal No. 1999-0887
Application No. 08/702,074
J. S. Moore et al. (Moore), “Energy Levels in Cobalt
Compensated Silicon,” 41 Journal of Applied Physics, No. 13,
5282-85 (December 1970).
Claims 1, 4, 5, and 9-36 stand finally rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a). As evidence of obviousness, the Examiner
offers Temple in view of Moore with respect to claims 1, 5, 9,
10, 14, 16-21, 25, 26, 30, and 32-36, adds Jaecklin to the
basic combination with respect to claims 11-13, and 27-29, and
adds Okabe to the basic combination with respect to claims 15
and 31. In separate rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a),
claims 21-23 are rejected as being unpatentable over Temple in
view of Jenny, and claims 1, 4, and 5 are rejected as being
unpatentable over Temple in view of Bemski.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, reference is made to the Briefs and Answer for the1
respective details.
OPINION
It is our view, after consideration of the record before
1The Appeal Brief was filed May 26, 1998 (Paper No. 10). In response
to the Examiner’s Answer dated August 4, 1998 (Paper No. 12), a Reply Brief
was filed October 13, 1998 (Paper No. 13), which was acknowledged and entered
by the Examiner as indicated in the communication dated October 23, 1998
(Paper No. 14).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007