Ex Parte Yoo et al - Page 2


          Appeal No. 2002-0528                                                       
          Application No. 09/524,519                                                 

          representative claim 25, the sole independent claim on appeal,             
          reproduced below:                                                          
                    25.  Field oxide isolation regions on the surface                
               of a silicon substrate with increased threshold                       
               voltages and reduced leakage currents, comprised of:                  
                    a silicon substrate having field oxide formed by                 
               local oxidation of silicon (LOCOS) resulting in                       
               thinner portions on the perimeter of said field oxide,                
               said field oxide surrounding device areas on said                     
               substrate;                                                            
                    said field oxide having sidewall portions formed                 
               from an insulating layer that is conformally deposited                
               and anisotropically etched back to increase the                       
               thickness of said thinner portions on said perimeter                  
               of said field oxide;                                                  
                    channel-stop implant regions formed by implanting                
               a dopant through said field oxide and through said                    
               sidewall portions formed from said insulating layer,                  
               said channel-stop implant regions having a modified                   
               implant profile resulting from said implanting of said                
               dopant through said sidewall portions thereby                         
               increasing said threshold voltages and reducing said                  
               leakage currents.                                                     
               In addition to appellants’ admitted prior art (Figure 1 of            
          the present specification), the examiner relies on the following           
          prior art reference as evidence of unpatentability:                        
          Liaw et al.            5,672,538           Sep. 30, 1997                  
               (Liaw)                                                                
               Claims 25 through 27 on appeal stand rejected under 35                
          U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Liaw in view of the                   
          appellants’ admitted prior art.  (Examiner’s answer mailed Oct.            
          19, 2001, paper 13, pages 3-4.)                                            
               We reverse.                                                           


                                          2                                          



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007