Ex Parte HASUNUMA et al - Page 3




          Appeal No. 2001-0646                                                        
          Application No. 09/227,935                                                  


               an anti-HF (hydrofluoric acid) side wall film not                      
               etched by hydrofluoric acid, provided to cover a side wall             
               of said connection hole at least near a lower end of said              
               connection hole;                                                       
          an interconnection layer provided to fill an inner                          
          portion of said connection hole; and                                        
          an impurity region provided in said semiconductor                           
          substrate extending from the lower end of said connection                   
          hole to said isolation region, wherein said impurity region                 
          comprises a first impurity region portion provided to                       
          connect said interconnection layer to said isolation region,                
          and a second impurity region portion provided near the lower                
          end of said connection hole and connected to said                           
          interconnection layer.                                                      
               The Examiner relies on the following prior art reference:1             
          Kuroda    5,825,059                 Oct. 20, 1998                           
               (filed Jan. 30, 1997)                                                  
               Claims 1, 2 and 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as           
          unpatentable over the admitted prior art in view of Kuroda.                 
               Rather than repeating the arguments of Appellants and the              
          Examiner, we make reference to the Briefs (Paper Nos. 15 and 17)            
          and the Examiner’s Answer (Paper No. 16) for the respective                 
          details thereof.                                                            




          1 In addition, the Examiner relies on the admitted prior art illustrated at 
          Figure 15 and described beginning at pages 1 and 2 of Appellants’           
          specification.                                                              
                                          3                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007