Appeal No. 1999-1647
Application 08/934,088
transistors of the image sensor type to have thicker gate
insulating films than thin film driver transistors. The
claims do not recite how the gate insulating films are made,
e.g., by using two layers for the image sensor elements or by
using a thermal oxide film, so only the relative film
thickness is at issue. The Examiner has not cited any prior
art evidence that would establish the obviousness of the
relative thickness limitation. Thus, we conclude that the
Examiner has failed to establish a prima facie case of
obviousness. The rejection of claims 17-20 is reversed.
Claims 21-23
The similar issue with claim 21 is whether the
combination of Wieder, Tasch, and Okamoto supports the
obviousness of the limitation "wherein a thickness of said
gate insulating film of said photo-sensitive thin film
transistors is thicker than a thickness of [said gate
insulating film of] said driving thin film transistors." The
combination of Wieder and Tasch has been discussed with
respect to claim 17. We consider here the effect of the added
reference to Okamoto.
- 10 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007