Appeal No. 2005-0176
Application No. 10/076,716
Based upon a review of the definitions provided by
appellants, and our independent research of the term, we find
that a “charge pump” is defined in the art as limited to the use
of capacitors to increase the voltage in a circuit. Since the
diode circuit in Smith can not function as a “charge pump,” we
must reverse the anticipation rejection of independent claims
1 and 14, and dependent claims 2, 4, 5, 15 and 16.
Turning next to the anticipation rejection of independent
claim 46, the examiner states (answer, page 6) that “Col. 13,
lines 20-30 state [that] the ESD is discharged to VDD, in the
embodiment of a large positive voltage with respect to VDD,
through VSS and diode 26, thus indicating 810, 816 are not
forward biased.” Appellants argue (reply brief, page 4) that the
referenced portion of Smith deals with the application of a large
positive voltage to one of the I/O pads, and does not pertain to
the bus lines. We agree with the appellants’ argument. Although
Smith indicates (column 13, lines 13 through 20) that the
segmented bus lines are precharged during normal operation, Smith
is silent as to the relative value of this precharge with respect
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007