Ex parte Liu

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

May 15, 2000

08367644 (B.P.A.I. May. 15, 2000)

An amendment after the final rejection was filed as1
paper no. 8 and was entered in the record for the purposes of
the appeal [paper no. 9].
-1-
THIS OPINION WAS NOT WRITTEN FOR PUBLICATION
The opinion in support of the decision being entered
today (1) was not written for publication in a law
journal and (2) is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 12
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
________________
Ex parte JIANN LIU
________________
Appeal No. 1997-0513
Application 08/367,644
________________
ON BRIEF
________________
Before KRASS, LALL and FRAHM, Administrative Patent Judges.
LALL, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134
from the Examiner's final rejection of Claims 19 to 21. 1
Claims 1 to 10 have been canceled and claims 11 to 18 have
Appeal No. 1997-0513
Application 08/367,644
-2-
been withdrawn from consideration.
The disclosed invention provides a vertical contact
structure for high density integrated circuits such as DRAMs.
The contact structure includes a vertical contact lying
between two gates and has an insulating sleeve separating the
vertical contact from a horizontal conductive layer. The
conductive layer has an opening which lies over a doped region
and extends partly over the two gates. The invention is
further illustrated by the following claim.
19. An integrated circuit contact structure, comprising:
(a) first and second insulated gates at the surface of a
substrate;
(b) sidewall insulators on said first and second gates,
said sidewall insulators made of a first material;
(c) a doped region in said substrate at said surface and
located between said gates;
(d) a conductive layer spaced from and overlying said
gates, said conductive layer having an opening over said doped
region and extending over a portion of each of said gates; and
(e) a contact extending from said doped region through
said opening to a higer [sic, higher] level than said
conductive layer, with the portion of said contact in said
opening not extending over any portion of said gates.
Appeal No. 1997-0513
Application 08/367,644
-3-
The Examiner’s rejection relies on the following
references:
Ishijima 4,985,718 Jan. 15, 1991
Gotou 5,126,810 Jun. 30, 1992
Claims 19 through 21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102
as being anticipated by Ishijima or Gotou.
Rather than repeat the arguments of Appellant and the
Examiner, we make reference to the brief and the answer for
the respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have considered the rejections advanced by the
Examiner and the supporting arguments. We have, likewise,
reviewed the Appellant’s arguments set forth in the brief.
It is our view that claims 19 to 21 are not anticipated
by Ishijima or Gotou. Accordingly, we reverse.
In our analysis, we are guided by the requirements of
anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102. Anticipation under 35
U.S.C. § 102 is established only when a single prior art
reference discloses, either expressly or under the principles
of inherency, each and every element of a claimed invention.
Appeal No. 1997-0513
Application 08/367,644
-4-
See RCA Corp. v. Applied Digital Data Sys., Inc., 730 F.2d
1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
Claims 19 through 21
These claims are rejected as being anticipated by
Ishijima or Gotou.
There is no dispute as to what Ishijima or Gotou
discloses. The crux of the issue is the interpretation of the
claims. We consider independent claim 19. The claim recites
the limitation "a conductive layer spaced from and overlying
said gates, said layer having an opening over said doped
region and extending over a portion of each of said gates."
Appellant argues [brief,
page 3] that neither Ishijima nor Gotou shows a conductive
layer which has an opening which overlies the doped region and
extends over a portion of each of the gates. The Examiner
vehemently disagrees with this interpretation of the claimed
recitation. The Examiner asserts [answer, pages 5 to 7] that
the above claimed limitation “does not require 'the opening in
the conductive layer to extend over the gates'" [id. 5].
Appeal No. 1997-0513
Application 08/367,644
-5-
We understand the Examiner’s position, based on his
interpretation of the claim. However, such an interpretation
of the claimed limitation is one which would result from
looking at the claim in vacuum. We find it clear that
undercuts 34 and 36 in the conducting layer 28 (figs. 3 and 4
of the specification) are provided to extend the opening 32
over a part of the gates 14 and 16, so that insulation 40
provides an extra insulating buffer between the contact 42 and
the conductive layer 28. Whereas we agree with the Examiner
that the claim would have been better drafted had Appellant
employed a better phrase to bring out the inventive feature
that it is the opening, and not the conductive layer, which
extends in part over the gates, we here construe the claim in
light of the specification. For example, the specification
states that “[a]nother important technical advantage of the
present invention is the fact that the conducting layer is
undercut at the contact hole, thereby allowing for sufficient
insulation to be disposed between the contact hole and the
conducting layer.” [Page 3, lines 27 to 31]. We interpret
the claimed limitation as requiring the opening in the
conductive layer to extend from the contact hole over a part
Appeal No. 1997-0513
Application 08/367,644
-6-
of the gates. With this interpretation of the claim, we agree
with Appellant that neither Ishijima nor Gotou shows this
feature.
Therefore, we do not sustain the anticipation rejection of
claim 19 and its dependent claims 20 and 21.
REVERSED
ERROL A. KRASS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
PARSHOTAM S. LALL ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
ERIC FRAHM )
Appeal No. 1997-0513
Application 08/367,644
-7-
Administrative Patent Judge )
psl/ki
Douglas A. Sorensen
Texas Instruments Incorporated
P. O. Box 655474 MS 219
Dallas, TX 75265