Appeal No. 2005-2247
Application No. 09/976,641
combination of bulk regions overlying epi regions of a substrate.” (Answer at page 5.)
The examiner identifies no direct or express support for this finding, and we find from
the Figures 2A-F of Chang that all of the regions of conductivity are “in” the substrate as
the examiner maintains. Furthermore, even if we assume that the Chang does teach or
fairly suggest the inclusion of all the layers of conductivity in the substrate, we are left
with the mere assertion that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art
at the time of the invention to desire to reduce the leakage current and to add the
additional lightly doped region used in the n type regions to the combination of buried
regions and epi- regions taught by Ovshinsky.
Appellants argue that neither Ovshinsky or Chang teach the formation of an
lightly doped region over a heavily doped region where both are formed in the substrate.
(Brief at page 5.) We agree with appellants that neither of Ovshinsky or Chang teach or
fairly suggest this aspect of the claimed invention and the examiner does not rely upon
the teachings of Slotboom to teach or suggest this feature of the claimed invention.
Appellants argue that there is no suggestion to modify both of the three layer
configurations of Ovshinsky and Chang to form a four layer structure. (Reply brief at
pages 2 et seq.) We agree with appellants.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007