Ex Parte Mitra - Page 8


                 Appeal No. 2005-2533                                                                                  
                 Application No. 09/976,559                                                                            

                 as mesas.  Further, even if we were to consider “patterning” to require removal of                    
                 material, which we do not, the claim does not identify what material is removed                       
                 and during what stage of manufacture.  Thus, the pattern is created by material                       
                 removal, the removal of sections of the passivation layer (the transition from                        
                 figures 4C to 4D), which provides the troths that produce the pattern in doping                       
                 layer 30.  For the forgoing reasons we sustain the examiner’s rejection of                            
                 independent claim 28 and dependent claims 29, 31 and 32 under 35 U.S.C. §                             
                 102.                                                                                                  
                        We next consider independent claim 41.  Initially, we note that appellant’s                    
                 arguments, on pages 9 and 10 of the brief, group dependent claims 42 and 44                           
                 through 46 with independent claim 41.  Appellant argues:                                              
                        [N]either Cockrum nor Rosbeck[1] show or suggest, “forming a patterned                         
                        doping layer above the passivation layer.”  Because the source layer 30 of                     
                        Cockrum is not above the passivation layer 18 and is in direct contact with                    
                        the p-type layer 12, no “a doped region extending through the passivation                      
                        layer into the radiation absorption layer” is formed.  Therefore, Cockrum                      
                        does not show or suggest . . . every limitation of claim 41.                                   
                        In response the examiner states, on page 10 of the answer:                                     
                        Cockrum et al. expressly teach thermal diffusion from a patterned source                       
                        layer 30 formed above the passivation layer 18 in order to form discrete n-                    
                        type regions with the resultant p-n junctions underlie the passivation layer                   
                        18 ….  A thermal diffusion from a patterned source layer 30 into Hg1-x                         
                        CdxZnTe would drive dopant from the patterned source layer 30 into both                        
                        the Hg1-xCdxZnTe radiation absorption layer (12) and the Hg1-xCdxZnTe                          
                        passivation layer (18).  Thus, Cockrum et al. disclose a doped region                          
                        extending through the passivation layer into the radiation absorption layer.                   



                                                                                                                       
                 1 We note that neither claim 41 nor any of the claims dependent upon claim                            
                 41 are rejected over Rosbeck alone or in combination.                                                 

                                                          -8-                                                          



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007