Appeal No. 2005-0287 Page 14
Application No. 09/216,214
Appellant acknowledges that Watabe discloses a silicided
polysilicon gate structure. See second reply brief, page 3.
However, appellant asserts that there is a lack of suggestion or
teaching supporting the examiner’s proposed combination of
references. In this regard, appellant argues that because “Arai
does not teach or even suggest a silicided polysilicon gate
structure, any combination with Arai of a reference showing a
silicided polysilicon gate could only be suggested by the subject
disclosure and for no other reason” (second reply brief, page 3).
However, appellant’s general assertion of a lack of
combinability of the references does not specifically address the
examiner’s asserted rationale for modifying Arai based on the
teachings of Watabe regarding the expectation of obtaining a
transistor structure that would not be degraded by
transconductance when employing such a conductive layer on the
polysilicon gate. In this regard, we note that Watabe teaches
that problems of increased resistance and degradation of
transconductance due to hot carrier effects in a metal-oxide-
silicon field effect transistor (MOSFET) can be prevented while
using a conductive layer on the polysilicon gate and that the
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007