Appeal No. 2006-0318
Application No. 10/195,271
We therefore are not convinced of reversible error in the
examiner’s rejection of claims 1 and 5. Accordingly, we affirm the
rejection of those claims.
Claims 2-4
Liang discloses an integrated circuit comprising two
transistors, one of which has a tantalum or molybdenum gate
material (130) and the other of which has a tantalum nitride gate
material (132) (col. 4, line 33; col. 5, lines 26-27 and 40;
figure 7).
Iwase discloses that many metals, one of which is niobium, are
suitable gate electrode materials (col. 6, lines 66-67).
The examiner argues:
As is well known in the art, highly doped (N or P )+ +
silicon is a conductive material. It is also well known
in the art that highly doped silicon and metals are
interchangeable. Hsu is used to show that the different
gates can have different textures and Liang is used to
show that the material of the gates can be tantalum or
molybdenum. [answer, page 5]
* * *
Hsu is used to show that the different gates have
different textures and Iwase is used to show that the
material can be niobium. [answer, pages 5-6]
The examiner has not provided evidence that Hsu’s disclosure
of using polycrystalline silicon for one gate and amorphous silicon
for another gate would have been considered by one of ordinary
skill in the art to be applicable to metals such that the person
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007