Appeal No. 2005-0888
Application No. 10/039,663
appellants’ specification, encompasses a capacitor, or that one of
ordinary skill in the art would have considered Yamasaki’s
capacitor to be an active component.
The examiner argues that “a transistor is an active element
regardless of how it is named” (answer, page 11), which is
incorrect. As indicated by the above definitions, to be an active
element Yamasaki’s MOS transistor must be capable of contributing
power or controlling voltages or currents to produce gain or
switching action. The examiner has not established that Yamasiki’s
MOS transistor, which has its gate connected to a power supply and
both its source and drain connected to ground (col. 8, lines 28-36
and 57-67; figures 2B and 3), is capable of functioning in that
manner.
The examiner, therefore, has not established a prima facie
case of anticipation or obviousness of the appellants’ claimed
invention.6
DECISION
6 The examiner does not rely upon Tani, Wolf or the admitted
prior art for any disclosure that remedies the above-discussed
deficiency in Yamasaki as to the independent claims.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007