Appeal No. 2002-1981
Application No. 09/316,580
substantially continuous first dielectric layer" clearly defines
over Moslehi's grid structure.
As the combined teachings of Moslehi and See fail to
disclose or suggest this claim feature, we find that the examiner
has failed to established a prima facie case of obviousness and
the rejection is reversed.
4. Rejection of claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over Moslehi in view of See and Sugimoto
The examiner relies on Sugimoto for the disclosure of a
dielectric layer made of diamond. However, we have concluded
that Sugimoto fails to remedy the deficiency in the combined
teachings of Moslehi and See discussed in connection with claim
1, from which claim 5 depends. In particular, Sugimoto fails to
disclose or suggest a substantially continuous first dielectric
layer overlying one side of the silicide layer as required by
claim 1.
Accordingly, the rejection is reversed.
5. Rejection of claims 7-9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over Ochiai in view of Kameyama.
The examiner found that Ochiai discloses the invention as
claimed with the exception of a teaching that the resistance
layer is made of silicide. The examiner relies on Kameyama as
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007