Appeal No. 2003-1298
Application No. 09/369,579
the material of the field oxide 22 (42) and that of the
trench 34 are each oxide, and therefore they make-up one
oxide structure. In this manner, the examiner asserts that
the word “separates” as claimed is incorrect.
Claim 34 is reproduced again, below, with text in bold
for emphasis:
34. An isolation structure including a
semiconductor substrate having a top surface, the
isolation structure comprising:
a pair of dielectric structures each of which
contacts a respective active region in
the semiconductor substrate, comprises oxide, and
rises lower above the top surface of the semiconductor
substrate than a substantially oval field oxide region
extending into the semiconductor substrate, wherein
the field oxide region has opposite sides each of
which makes contact with the deposited oxide of a
respective one of the dielectric structures, wherein
each one of said pair of dielectric structures
constitutes a structural barrier that separates said
respective active region from said field oxide region,
thus preventing the encroachment of material from said
field oxide region into said respective active region;
and
nitride layers upon respective oxide layers, each
said oxide layer contacting one of said dielectric
structures and one of the active regions, and wherein
each one of said pair of dielectric structures
constitutes a structural barrier that separates said
substantially oval field oxide region from each of
said nitride layers.
Referring to appellants’ Figure 6, we find that claim
34 requires that the dielectric structures 34 are between
the field oxide region 42 and nitride layers 16 and between
the field oxide region 42 and active regions 44. In this
way, the word “separates” is used. Comparing this subject
matter with Figure 5B of Vasquez, we provide the following.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007