Appeal No. 2004-0627
Application No. 09/766,965
and the contact region of region 163a. The contact
region abuts source region 159a and shares a common
electrode 169a. There is no room for a field oxide
region between the second and contact regions, and even
if one could be formed adjacent to the contact region,
it would overlie source region 159a and interfere with
source contact to the device and the operation of the
p-channel transistor.
(Paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of Brief). Appellants further
maintain that neither region 141a nor region 141b, cited by the
examiner as field oxide regions, is between contact region 163a
and source region 159a as claimed.
The flaw in appellants' argument is that, although it
accurately describes the MOS device of Williams, it does not
address the thrust of the examiner's rejection. In relevant
part, the examiner sets forth the following:
However, Appellant's [sic, Appellants'] argument
is not persuasive because Fig. 25O is showing a cross-
section of a three dimensional object. William's [sic,
Williams'] substrate is round; layers 163a and 159a are
circular in their configuration. This is shown in
Fig. 25O where layers 163a and 159a are repeated in
different locations (see Fig. 25O). Further Fig. 25O
shows that field oxide region 141a is located between
layer a first location of region 159a and a second
location of region 163a. The differing locations are
attributable to the region's three dimensional,
circular configuration. [Paragraph bridging pages 6
and 7 of Answer).
Hence, it is the examiner's position that field oxide region
141a is, in fact, located between a first location of region
159a, the presently claimed "second region," and a second
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007