Appeal No. 2003-1315
Application No. 09/503,838
stored parasitic capacitance value of a dummy structure when
analyzing a test structure. But for appellant’s disclosed and
claimed invention, nothing in the record before us teaches or
would have suggested such a step to the skilled artisan.
In view of the foregoing, the obviousness rejection of
claims 1 through 4, 13, 14 and 16 is reversed.
The obviousness rejections of claims 5 through 12 and 17 are
reversed because the admitted prior art, the IBM TDB and Akram
fail to cure the noted shortcomings in the teachings of Aeba and
Olowolafe.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007