Ex Parte Cheng et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jun 22, 2016

13452335 (P.T.A.B. Jun. 22, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
13/452,335 04/20/2012
134779 7590
Thompson Hine LLP
10050 Innovation Drive
Suite 400
Dayton, OH 45342-4934
06/24/2016
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Peng Cheng
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
BUR920110229US 1 6664
EXAMINER
GONDARENKO, NATALIA A
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2891
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
06/24/2016 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address( es):
ipdocket@thompsonhine.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte PENG CHENG, DAVID L. HARAME, ROBERT K. LEIDY,
and QIZHI LIU
Appeal2014-009808
Application 13/452,335
Technology Center 2800
Before MAHSHID D. SAADAT, ROBERT E. NAPPI, and
JOHN D. HAMANN Administrative Patent Judges.
NAPPI, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the
Examiner's rejection of claims 1, 4, 6 through 11, and 28 through 37. Final
Act. 1.
We reverse.
Appeal2014-009808
Application 13/452,335
INVENTION
The invention is directed to a method for fabricating a device structure
such as a bipolar junction transistor. See Abstract.
Claim 1 is illustrative of the invention and reproduced below:
1. A method of fabricating a bipolar junction
transistor, the method comprising:
forming a first isolation region having a sidewall that is
coextensive with a collector region;
after the first isolation region is formed, forming an
intrinsic base layer comprised of a semiconductor material on
the collector region;
after the intrinsic base layer is formed, forming a first
trench penetrating through the intrinsic base layer and into the
collector region, the first trench laterally separated from the
sidewall of the first isolation region by a first portion of the
collector region;
filling the first trench with an electrical insulator to form
a second isolation region; and
forming an emitter coupled with the intrinsic base layer.
REJECTIONS AT ISSUE
The Examiner rejected claims 1, 4, 6, 8, 9, and 34 through 37 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Geiss et al. (2007/0207567 Al,
published Sept. 6, 2007) and Chan et al. (US 2005/0145953 Al, published
July 7, 2005). Final Act. 3---6. 1
1 Throughout this opinion we refer to the Appeal Brief dated May 27, 2014,
the Reply Brief dated September 15, 2014, the Final Office Action mailed
Footnote continued on next page.
2
Appeal2014-009808
Application 13/452,335
The Examiner rejected claim 7 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Geiss, Chan and Adam (US 2005/0151225 Al; published
July 14, 2005). Final Act. 6-7.
The Examiner rejected claims 10, 11, and 28 through 33 under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Geiss, Chan, and Lam et al. (US
2009/0286368 Al, Nov. 19, 2009). Final Act. 7-13.
ANALYSIS
Obviousness rejections
Independent claim 1 recites a limitation directed to forming a trench,
after the intrinsic base layer is formed, penetrating through the intrinsic base
layer and into the collector region. App. Br. 11. Appellants argue that
neither Giess nor Chan teaches forming a trench after forming the intrinsic
base layer as claimed. App. Br. 3-5. The Examiner, in response to
Appellants' arguments, finds that Chan teaches forming a trench in
semiconductor layer, item 112, and the collector region. Ans. 3. Further,
the Examiner considers semiconductor layer 112, to be an intrinsic base
layer because "claim 1 defines an intrinsic base layer as a layer comprised of
a semiconductor material on the collector region." Ans. 3. Appellants reply
that layer 112 is not an intrinsic base layer, an intrinsic base layer has a
meaning in the art and that Chan teaches another layer is the intrinsic base
layer, item 400 in Figure 4. Reply Br. 3--4 (citing Chan, Fig. 4, and para.
44). We concur with the Appellants and do not sustain the Examiner's
January 29, 2014 ("Final Act."), and the Examiner's Answer mailed on July
28, 2014.
3
Appeal2014-009808
Application 13/452,335
rejection of independent claim 1, and dependent claims 4, 6 through 11, and
28 through 37.
DECISION
We reverse the Examiner's rejections of claims 1, 4, 6 through 11, and
28 through 37.
REVERSED
4