Appeal No. 2001-1419
Application No. 09/199,960
subsequent formation of more heavily doped source/drain regions.
We conclude therefore that at least the right side of the top of
the pictured gate electrode in Chatterjee’s Figure 2 extends only
over the LDD region.
It is further our view that, although the Figure 2 picture
of the top left side of the gate electrode in Chatterjee arguably
overlaps the spacer edge, the only reasonable conclusion from the
entirety of the disclosure of Chatterjee, whose textual
description is silent about the extent of the top of the gate
electrode, is that the skilled artisan would recognize and
appreciate the obviousness of extending the gate electrode to any
distance over the source/drain regions. In other words, the gate
electrode could obviously overlap the spacer on one side and not
the other or not overlap at all, i.e., so that it extends only
over the LDD regions as in Appellants’ claims. Appellants have
presented no evidence to rebut the presumption of obviousness of
this feature and, as asserted by the Examiner, Appellants’ own
specification has no written disclosure to support the
criticality of the gate electrode extent feature. In fact, since
Appellants’ written disclosure has no description at all of such
gate electrode coverage feature, we can only conclude that
Appellants’ only rationale for limiting the extent of the top of
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007