Appeal 2007-2983
Application 10/029,583
etching followed by placing at least one molecule in the at least one
nanopore.
As discussed above, Kikuchi discloses/suggests a method for forming
a small micro-pore using microspheres as masks and etching with steps
substantially corresponding to the claim 24 steps but for the required
nanoparticle size mask and nano-size pore. The Examiner takes the position
that the claim 24 requirement for dispersing at least one molecule in the pore
that is made is inclusive of dispersing more than one molecule in the pore.
In other words, the Examiner seemingly takes the position that the use of the
pores formed by Kikuchi for ultimately placing other materials therein for
making a device (such as the emitters thereof or some other material) would
have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art from the combined
teachings of the applied references, including Jun. Such a modified method
is within the scope of representative claim 24 because claim 24 is not limited
by the types or amounts of materials deposited in the pores that are formed.
Appellants’ arguments against the Examiner’s rejection of
representative claim 24 centers on their contention that the claimed
invention is directed to a molecular device rather than a semiconductor
device as the applied references are generally directed toward.
We do not find that contention and the myriad arguments that depend
on such a claim construction for rejected claim 24 persuasive (Br. 11-12 and
Reply Br. 2-4). This is so because representative claim 24 does not require
the preparation of a molecular electronic device.2 Rather, Claim 24 requires
2 Indeed, in the event of further prosecution of this subject matter before the
Examiner, the Examiner should review Appellants’ Specification to
determine whether or not the Specification, as filed, completely describes
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013