• CAFC vacates PTAB decisions in Netlist v. Diablo

    Of note in the Netlist case


    Netlist argues the Board’s constructions are wrong
    because its analysis is based on a flawed interpretation of
    “selectively electrically coupling.” We agree. The specification
    uses the terms “coupling” and “isolating” in a
    similar fashion. With respect to the ’150 patent, the
    Board’s construction of “selectively isolating” seems to be
    based on its erroneous construction of “selectively electrically
    coupling.” The Board simply changed “making a
    selection . . . to transfer power” into “making a selection
    . . . and not transferring power.” Because we find the
    Board’s analysis of “selectively electrically coupling” was
    flawed, we also conclude the Board’s construction of
    “selectively isolating/isolate” was erroneous.

    AND footnote 1:


    There appears to be a typographical error in the
    Board’s final written decision for the ’536 patent. This
    construction is taken from the Board’s institution decision,
    which the Board stated that it intended to adopt for
    its final written decision.

    Continue Reading ...
  • CAFC explicates the meaning of the word "over" in Home Semiconductor. PTAB reversed.

    In Home Semiconductor v, Samsung [2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 13356 ], appellant Home won a reversal of PTAB:


    Home Semiconductor Corp. (“Home”) appeals from the
    final written decision of the United States Patent and
    Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the
    Board”) in an inter partes review (“IPR”) proceeding
    finding that, inter alia, claims 2 and 9–14 of U.S. Patent
    6,146,997 (“the ’997 patent”) are unpatentable as anticipated
    by U.S. Patent 6,277,720 (“Doshi”). Home Semiconductor
    Corp. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., No. IPR2015-
    00460, 2016 Pat. App. LEXIS 7424 (P.T.A.B. Apr. 20,
    2016) (“Final Decision”). For the reasons that follow, we
    reverse

    [meaning the patentee-appellant, Home, wins.]

    At issue was the meaning of the word “over”:


    This appeal primarily involves the meaning of the
    word “over” in the context of the claims, written description,
    and figures.

    In part, the disagreement:


    In its patent owner response, Home argued that “forming an oxide layer over the diffusion region” in claims 2 and 9 should mean “forming an oxide layer covering the diffusion region” in light of the specification. J.A. 499 (emphasis added). Based on its proposed construction, Home argued that Doshi did not anticipate the challenged claims.

    In reply, as it had done in its IPR petition, Samsung argued that the broadest reasonable interpretation of “forming an oxide layer over the diffusion region” should be “forming an oxide layer above the diffusion region.” J.A. 695-96. Samsung argued that construing “over” as “covering” was too narrow a reading for a person of ordinary skill in the art and that its argument was supported by Becker, which describes gate electrode structures that do not cover the substrate as being “over” the substrate.

    Of PTAB’s analysis of ONE argument by Samsung:


    It is undisputed that the oxidation in Doshi occurs on the sides of the gate electrode, which itself does not verti-cally overlap with the diffusion region and is only aligned on an extended edge above the diffusion region. Regard-less whether the oxidation of the polysilicon 22 in Doshi results in an oxide being formed within the sidewall filament 11, the polysilicon 22, or both, the “oxide layer” in Doshi, which teeters above on the outermost edge of the diffusion region, cannot be understood as an oxide layer formed “over the diffusion region.” The Board rejected Home’s similar line of argument that the oxide layer in Doshi is “higher but off to the side.” Final Decision, 2016 Pat. App. LEXIS 7424, at *33-35. It is difficult to discern the Board’s reasoning and analysis in response, but
    regardless, we conclude that the Board erred in its antici-pation finding because its claim construction was flawed.
    Doshi’s “oxide layer” is only “above” the diffusion re-gion in the sense that it is higher in position, but is mere-ly insignificantly overlapping with the diffusion region, and therefore is not “over the diffusion region.” “[O]xidizing the sides” of the gate electrode in Doshi is not “forming an oxide layer over the diffusion region”; it is the “layer of silicon nitride” that is “deposited overall” in Doshi. Doshi col. 7 ll. 59-60. Substantial evidence thus does not support the Board’s finding [*18] of anticipation be-cause Doshi fails to teach forming an oxide layer over the diffusion region in addition to on the sidewalls of the gate electrode. Because independent claim 9 is not anticipated by Doshi, dependent claims 10-14 are also not anticipated by Doshi.

    There was another argument by Samsung, which “fell by the wayside.”

    Of interest to IPBiz was the argument not addressed by
    the Board:


    Samsung argues in the alternative that a growth of
    the oxide layer in Doshi occurs over, and covers, the
    diffusion region. Although argued for by Samsung during
    the IPR proceeding
    , the Board did not make a specific
    finding on whether an oxide layer grows over and covers
    the diffusion region. Even if factual findings to that effect
    had been made in favor of Samsung, they would only have
    been relevant if Samsung had argued that Doshi inherently
    teaches the limitation because Samsung had admitted
    that Doshi does not expressly disclose an oxide layer
    covering the diffusion region. Because such argument
    was not squarely before the Board
    , and the Board did not
    decide on what appears to be an inherency argument, the
    issue is not properly before us
    .

    Continue Reading ...
  • COMPLEX 複雑・複合・複素数・錯体

                            目次はこちら

    COMPLEX  複雑・複合・複素数・錯体

    $$ Further, existing variable guide vane arrangements are complex and expensive. / さらに、既存の可変案内翼装置は複雑で高価であった。(USP8226356)

    $$ The electronic filter therefore needs to have a complex amplitude and phase response. / したがって、電子フィルタは複合的な振幅・位相応答を有する必要がある。(USP8165312)

    $$ The input and output signals, p1 & p2 and q1 & q2, are assumed to be complex. / 入出力信号p1及びp2並びにq1及びq2は、複素数であると仮定する。(USP8103225)

    $$ Alternatively, the metal complex may be chemically bound to the host material. / あるいは、金属錯体はホスト素材と化学的に結合させてもよい。(USP8084767)

    $$ Any suitable metal complex dopant can be used. / いかなる適切な金属錯体ドープ材も使用できる。(USP8063554)

    $$ Thus a complex 3D surface is effectively collapsed to a 2D image. / 従って、複素3D表面が有効に2D映像へと潰される。(USP8068049)

    $$ The pattern of insulin release in people without diabetes is complex. / 糖尿病ではない人のインシュリンの分泌パターンは複雑である。(USP8048041)

    $$ Where the overall complex is charged, counterions are present. / 錯体全体が帯電している場合、対イオンが存在する。(USP8066944)

    $$ Inspection, maintenance and repair can be complex. / 点検、メンテナンス、および修理は複雑である場合がある。(USP7605002)

    $$ Such complex structures also add to the cost of the generator. / こうした複雑な構造物はジェネレータのコストも増大させる。(USP7592605)

    $$ The algorithm applies equally well for complex data input signals. / アルゴリズムは、複雑なデータ入力信号に対して同等に良好に適用される。(USP7049984)

    $$ Alternatively the metallocene complex may be used in an unsupported form. / 代案としてメタロセン錯体は非支持形態で使用することもできる。(USP6437062)

    $$ Thus complex declarations may be made. (USP7430563)

    $$ In general, the hybrid spectrum for an extended target will be more complex. (USP6888492)

    $$ FIG. 11 shows the performance of complex number translation for m=500; (USP6810118): (complex number 複素数)

    $$ Alternatively, the shape of the screen may be a complex aspheric shape. (USP6735015)

    $$ It is possible to have extremely complex declarations in Handel-C. (USP6691301)

    $$ Alternatively a more complex structure may be used, e.g. Ti/TiN/Al/TiN. (USP6559914)

    $$ The conditions that can be specified in a rule can be complex. (USP6138168)

                            目次はこちら

    Continue Reading ...