Appeal No. 2002-1981
Application No. 09/316,580
Appellants' principle argument is that Moslehi fails to
teach "the substantially continuous first dielectric layer
overlying one side of said silicide layer" as required by claim
1. Appeal brief, page 10. In this regard, appellants point out
that in the Moslehi structure, the layer overlying the oxide
layer 22 contains both a silicide 40 and a metal 24 in a grid
pattern. Id.
The examiner, on the other hand, takes the position that
while claim 1 recites a "substantially continuous silicide layer
over the handle die,” the claim never requires a “continuous
unpatterned silicide layer over the handle die." Examiner's
answer, page 16. The examiner maintains that "[s]ince the
polycrystalline silicon layer [38] is a continuous, grid-
patterned layer, the TiSi2 (titanium silicide) layer [40] is also
a continuous, grid-patterned layer formed on the handle die
[20]." Id.
In determining what is meant by words in a claim, we look to
the specification. See In re Cruciferous Sprout Litigation v.
Sunrise Farms, 301 F.2d 1343, 1348, 64 USPQ2d 1202, 1205 (Fed.
Cir. 2002). We have reviewed the specification and are in
agreement with appellants that the claim language "a
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007