Appeal No. 2003-0456 Page 3
Application No. 09/149,289
forming at least one output terminal on the rear surface of the
substrate;
forming a conductor over said second electrode and into said hole
wherein one of said first and second electrodes is electrically connected
with said output terminal through said conductor.
Claims 1-8 and 17-20, 22, 24-27, 29, 31, and 32 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as obvious over U.S. Patent No. 4,965,655 ("Grimmer"); U.S. Patent No.
4,754,544 ("Hanak"); and U.S. Patent No. 5,296,043 ("Kawakami"). Claims 21, 23, 28,
and 30 stand rejected under § 103(a) as obvious over Grimmer; Hanak; Kawakami; and
U.S. Patent No. 5,259,891 ("Matsuyama").
OPINION
Rather than reiterate the positions of the examiner or the appellants in toto, we
address the main point of contention therebetween. Admitting that Grimmer "do[es] not
show opening at least one hole through the common substrate and do[es] not show
forming an output terminal on the rear surface," (Examiner's Answer at 3), the examiner
concludes, "[i]t would have been obvious to modify the Grimmer et al. methods to
include the steps of forming the via taught by Hanak, as improved by Kawakami et al. to
provide a method for contacting the device that would not interfere with the front
surface of the device." (Id. at 4.) He asserts, "for a device that is intended to react to
incident light, it is necessary to insure that no obstructions to such light are provided . . .
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007