Appeal 2007-0377
Application 10/151,897
35 U.S.C. § 103 Rejection
With respect to the rejection of claims 60-64, 66, 67, and 69-73, the
Examiner relies on Schrems ‘703 for teaching the interface layers as SiO2
precipitations in the polycrystalline and on Sze for teaching the presence of such
dopant at the grain boundary in the polycrystalline silicon (Answer 4-6).
Appellants argue that Sze teaches against its combination with Schrems ‘703 since
Sze identifies the precipitates as undesirable as they act as sites for dislocation
generation (Br. 14). Therefore, the issue is whether the combination of Schrems
‘703 and Sze suggests interface layers between the crystals of the polycrystalline
region to control the grain growth in that region.
Schrems ‘703 teaches that the presence of SiO2 dopant precipitations limits
the grain growth in the polycrystalline region (col. 5, ll. 32-39) while the density of
such dopant precipitations is greater in the vicinity of the interface between the
monocrystalline and the non-monocrystalline region of buried strap 16 (col. 6, ll.
35-40). Sze, teaches that when dopant concentration in diffused polysilicon
exceeds the solid solubility, excess dopant segregates at the grain boundaries (Sze
103-104). Additionally, we find Appellants’ arguments (Br. 13; Reply Br. 4)
contrasting the interfacial layers shown in Appellants’ Figure 4 with the teachings
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013