Appeal No. 2006-1663
Application No. 09/871,883
CLAIMS 23-24 AND 28-29
Claim 23 recites the “liner-to-liner contact region further comprises second
portions co-extensive with said lower conductive liner on portions of second sides
of said lower level wire under vias of said second portion of said array of vias.”
Claim 28 requires that the liner-to-liner contact region have “second portions co-
extensive with said lower conductive liner on portions of second sides of said
extensions of said lower level wire under vias of said second portion of said array
of vias.” Claim 24 requires the “liner-to-liner contact region further comprises a
third portion co-extensive with said lower conductive liner on an end of said lower
level wire under vias of said second portion of said array of vias.” Claim 29 recites
that the liner-to-liner contact region has “a third portion co-extensive with said
lower conductive liner on an end of said lower level wire under vias of said second
portion of said array of vias.”
The Examiner rejects claims 23-24 and 28-29 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over
Farrar in view of Havemann (Answer 4-6).
Appellants reiterate the following arguments they previously made with
respect to claims 16-18: (1) Havemann does not disclose vias which are required
by claims 23-24 and 28-29 and (2) Havemann’s encapsulation layer 48 (i.e., upper
conductive liner) is disclosed as being made of silicon nitride which is non-
conductive, so Havemann does not disclose an upper conductive liner. These
arguments are not persuasive.
We addressed arguments (1) and (2) in our discussion of claims 16-18. The
same disposition (i.e., unpersuasive) of those arguments applies to claims 23-24
and 28-29.
21
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007