Ex parte TAKENAKA

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Sep 4, 1998

08093790 (B.P.A.I. Sep. 4, 1998)

Application for patent filed July 19, 1993. According to appellant,1
this application is a continuation of application 07/853,691, filed July 16,
1992.
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(2) is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 29
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte KAZUHIRO TAKENAKA
__________
Appeal No. 95-4929
Application 08/093,7901
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before MARTIN, FLEMING and TORCZON, Administrative Patent Judges.
FLEMING, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal from the final rejection of
claims 4 through 10. Claims 1 through 3 have been canceled.
Appeal No. 95-4929
Application 08/093,790
2
The invention relates to a memory structure using a ferro-
electric material. More particularly, the invention relates to a
nonvolatile memory capable of electric re-writing.
The independent claim 4 is reproduced as follows:
4. A semiconductor device comprising:
a transistor having a gate electrode over a
substrate, and source and drain electrodes in said
substrate;
a ferroelectric capacitor located above said
substrate and including a lower electrode, a
dielectric including a ferroelectric material
which is located over said lower electrode, and an
upper electrode having first and second portions,
said dielectric being located between said first
portion and the substrate, said second portion
extending to and being in direct contact with said
source electrode.
The Examiner relies on the following references:
Sigg et al. (Sigg) 4,141,022 Feb. 20, 1979
Green et al. (Green) 4,851,895 Jul. 25, 1989
Takenaka (Takenaka 049) 5,043,049 Aug. 27, 1991
Miller et al. (Miller) 5,046,043 Sep. 03, 1991
Takenaka (Takenaka 305) 5,099,305 Mar. 24, 1992
Claims 4, 7 and 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Takenaka 049 in view of Takenaka 305.
Claims 4 through 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Takenaka 049 in view of Takenaka 305 and
further in view of Miller, Green or Sigg.
Appeal No. 95-4929
Application 08/093,790
3
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellant and the
Examiner, reference is made to the brief and answer for the
respective details thereof.
OPINION
After a careful review of the evidence before us, we do not
agree with the Examiner that claims 4 through 10 are properly
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
The Examiner has failed to set forth a prima facie case. It
is the burden of the Examiner to establish why one having
ordinary skill in the art would have been led to the claimed
invention by the express teachings or suggestions found in the
prior art, or by implications contained in such teachings or
suggestions. In re Sernaker, 702 F.2d 989, 995, 217 USPQ 1, 6
(Fed. Cir. 1983). "Additionally, when determining obviousness,
the claimed invention should be considered as a whole; there is
no legally recognizable 'heart' of the invention." Para-Ordnance
Mfg. v. SGS Importers Int’l, Inc., 73 F.3d 1085, 1087, 37 USPQ2d
1237, 1239 (Fed. Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 117 S.Ct. 80 (1996)
citing W. L. Gore & Assocs., Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d
Appeal No. 95-4929
Application 08/093,790
4
1540, 1548, 220 USPQ 303, 309 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469
U.S. 851 (1984).
In regard to the rejection of claims 4, 7 and 9 as being
unpatentable over Takenaka 049 in view of Takenaka 305, Appellant
argues on pages 11 and 12 of the brief that neither Takenaka 049
nor Takenaka 305 teaches a portion of the upper electrode that
extends to and is directly in contact with the source electrode
as recited in Appellant's claim 4. We note that Appellant's
independent claim 4 recites "an upper electrode having first and
second portions ... said second portion extending to and being in
direct contact with said source electrode."
The Examiner points out on page 2 of the answer that
Takenaka 049 does not teaches an upper electrode having a second
portion extending to and being in direct contract with the source
electrode, but does teach in Figure 1C a lower electrode being in
direct contract with the source electrode. The Examiner relies
on Takenaka 305 for the teaching of a upper electrode being in
direct contract with the source electrode. In particular, the
Examiner states that Takenaka 305 teaches a "top" electrode 111
contacting the source/drain region in Figure 11.
Appeal No. 95-4929
Application 08/093,790
5
Upon our review of Takenaka 305, we fail to find that
Takenaka 305 teaches "an upper electrode having first and second
portions ... said second portion extending to and being in direct
contact with said source electrode" as recited in Appellants'
claim 4. Takenaka 305 teaches in column 1, lines 55-64, that the
dielectric 1108 is sandwiched between two electrodes 1107 and
1109 to create a ferroelectric capacitor. Takenaka 305 further
teaches in column 1, lines 55-64, that the source is shown as
element 1103. Figure 11 shows that the electrode 1109 is the top
electrode. Figure 11 further shows that this electrode is not in
direct contact with the source 1103. Takenaka 305 teaches in
column 1, lines 55-64, that the source is contact with an
aluminum connection electrode 1111 and the cell is completed by a
second inter-layer insulating film 1110 and this aluminum
connection electrode 1111.
Furthermore, we fail to find in reason to modify Takenaka
049 to obtain Appellant's invention. The Federal Circuit states
that "[t]he mere fact that the prior art may be modified in the
manner suggested by the Examiner does not make the modification
Appeal No. 95-4929
Application 08/093,790
6
obvious unless the prior art suggested the desirability of the
modification." In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1266 n.14, 23 USPQ2d
1780, 1783-84 n.14 (Fed. Cir. 1992), citing In re Gordon, 733
F.2d 900, 902, 221 USPQ 1125, 1127 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
Furthermore, rejecting patents solely by finding prior art
corollaries for the claimed elements would permit an examiner to
use the claimed invention itself as a blueprint for piecing
together elements in the prior art to defeat the patentability of
the claimed invention. Such an approach would be an illogical
and inappropriate process by which to determine patentability.
In re Rouffet, 47 USPQ2d 1453, 1457 (Fed. Cir. 1998).
In regard to the rejection of claims 4 through 10 under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Takenaka 049 in view of
Takenaka 305 and further in view of Miller, Green or Sigg, we
note that the Examiner relies on Takenaka 049 for the teaching of
a upper electrode being in direct contract with the source
electrode. Therefore, we will not sustain this rejection for the
same reasons set forth above.
Appeal No. 95-4929
Application 08/093,790
7
We have not sustained the rejection of claims 4 through 10
under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Accordingly, the Examiner's decision is
reversed.
Reversed
JOHN C. MARTIN )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
MICHAEL R. FLEMING ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
RICHARD TORCZON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
Appeal No. 95-4929
Application 08/093,790
8
William J. Kubida, Esq.
Holland & Hart
555 17th Street
Suite 3200
P.O. Box 8749
Denver, CO 80201-8749