Appeal No. 2004-0550
Application No. 09/802,201
Appellants’ arguments are not persuasive for reasons stated
by the examiner (Answer, pages 16-17). The examiner finds that
Wu teaches dosage levels for arsenic that overlap the ranges
recited in claim 8 on appeal (Answer, pages 7 and 16).
Furthermore, the examiner has advanced sound reasoning as to why
the implantation step of Wu for a transistor would have been
applicable for doping levels in the capacitor of Rajkanan
(Answer, page 17).
Appellants argue that Boden discloses a p-type polysilicon
gate for use in conjunction with p+ type source/drain regions
(Brief, pages 9-10). Although this argument is correct, the
examiner has only applied Boden to establish the conventional
doping level for p+ type polysilicon gates (Answer, page 18).
Appellants argue that there is no motivation to substitute
different elements from different types of structures having
dissimilar profiles and characteristics (Brief, page 10). This
argument is not well taken for reasons discussed previously,
namely that Lee is directed to a capacitor, not only a
transistor, and the teachings of Wu directed to transistors, are
also applicable to the method of Rajkanan in the formation of
capacitors and transistors (Answer, pages 17-18).
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007