DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s Amendment filed on December 11, 2025. Claims 1, 6, 11 and 16 have been amended. No new claims have been added. No claims have been canceled. Currently, claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on December 11, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant argues, “Huang does not disclose a metal-insulator-metal (MITV) capacitor including a first electrode plate, a first capacitor dielectric on the first electrode plate, a second electrode plate on the first capacitor dielectric, where the second electrode plate has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the first capacitor dielectric, a second capacitor dielectric on the second electrode plate, where the second capacitor dielectric has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the second electrode plate, and a third electrode plate on the second capacitor dielectric, where the third electrode plate has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the second capacitor dielectric, as is required by Applicant's claims”.
The Applicant’s arguments regarding Huang are considered unpersuasive because (1) the claim language does not require the entire bottommost surface of the second electrode plate to be above an uppermost surface of the first capacitor dielectric nor does it require the entire bottommost surface of the second capacitor dielectric to be above an uppermost surface of the second electrode plate, (2) the claimed structure is already taught by Ando, a reference that was not adequately addressed by the Applicant’s response.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 6, 11 and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities: “a first end second end” should recite “a first end and a second end”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (US 2020/0035780 A1; hereafter Huang) in view of Childs et al. (US 2013/0270675 A1; hereafter Childs) and further in of Chang et al. (US 2012/0319239 A1; hereafter Chang).
Regarding claim 1, Huang teaches a metal-insulator-metal (MIM) capacitor (see e.g., MIM capacitor structure 500B, Figure 2H), comprising:
a first electrode plate, the first electrode plate having a lateral width between a first end a second end (see e.g., bottom electrode layer 320 having a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Para [0050], Figure 2H);
a first capacitor dielectric on the first electrode plate, the first capacitor dielectric comprising a high-k dielectric material, wherein the first capacitor dielectric has a lateral width between a first end and a second end (see e.g., dielectric layer 330, equivalent to dielectric layer 230, is made of a high-k dielectric materials including oxides of Li, Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Sc, Y, Zr, Hf, Al, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, Lu, or another applicable material has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Paras [0024], [0051], Figure 2H), the first end of the first capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the first end of the first electrode plate, and the second end of the first capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the second end of the first electrode plate (see e.g., as shown in Figure 2H the first end of dielectric layer 330 is in vertical alignment with the first end of the bottom electrode layer 320, and the second end of the dielectric layer 330 is in vertical alignment with the second end of the bottom electrode layer 320)
a second electrode plate on the first capacitor dielectric, the second electrode plate having a portion over and parallel with the first electrode plate (see e.g., middle electrode layer 332 on the dielectric layer 330. The middle electrode layer 332 has a portion over and parallel to the bottom electrode layer 320, Para [0055], Figure 2H), and the second electrode plate having a lateral width between a first end a second end (see e.g., the middle electrode layer 332 has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Figure 2E), wherein the second electrode plate has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the first capacitor dielectric (see e.g., middle electrode layer 332 has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface 327 of the dielectric layer 330, Para [0051], Figure 2B; Examiner’s interpretation: the claim does not require the entirety of the bottommost surface of the second electrode plate to be above the uppermost surface of the first capacitor dielectric);
a second capacitor dielectric on the second electrode plate, the second capacitor dielectric comprising the high-k dielectric material (see e.g., dielectric layer 340 on the middle electrode layer 332 made of a high-k dielectric materials including oxides of Li, Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Sc, Y, Zr, Hf, Al, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, Lu, or another applicable material, Para [0055], Figure 2H), wherein the second capacitor dielectric has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, (see e.g., dielectric layer 340 has a lateral width between a first end and a second end 332, Figure 2E); the first end of the second capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the first end of the second electrode plate, and the second end of the second capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the second end of the second electrode plate (see e.g., as shown in Figure 2H the first end of the dielectric layer 340 is in vertical alignment with the first end of the middle electrode layer 332 and the second end of the dielectric layer 340 is in vertical alignment with the second end of the middle electrode layer 332), wherein the second capacitor dielectric has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the second electrode plate (see e.g., the dielectric layer 340 has a bottommost surface above the uppermost surface of the middle electrode layer 332; Examiner’s interpretation: the claim does not require the entirety of the bottommost surface of the second capacitor dielectric to be above the uppermost surface of the second electrode plate);
a third electrode plate on the second capacitor dielectric, the third electrode plate having a lateral width (see e.g., top electrode layer 342 on the dielectric layer 340. The top electrode layer 342 has a lateral width, Para [0059], Figure 2H), wherein the third electrode plate has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the second capacitor dielectric (see e.g., the top electrode layer 342 has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface 341 of the dielectric layer 340; Examiner’s interpretation: the claim does not require the entirety of the bottommost surface of the third electrode plate to be above the uppermost surface of the second capacitor dielectric);
Huang does not explicitly teach
“dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material,”
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material (see e.g., a capacitor dielectric material maybe a barium strontium titanate (BST) material; Examiner’s interpretation: BST is an example of perovskite dielectric material, Para [0021]).
Applicant has not shown any unexpected results with perovskite or a non-perovskite dielectric material. In order to rely on equivalence as a rationale supporting an obviousness rejection, the equivalency must be recognized in the prior art, and cannot be based on applicant’s disclosure or the mere fact that the components at issue are functional or mechanical equivalents. In reRuff, 256 F.2d 590, 118 USPQ 340 (CCPA 1958) (The mere fact that components are claimed as members of a Markush group cannot be relied upon to establish the equivalency of these components. However, an applicant’s expressed recognition of an art-recognized or obvious equivalent may be used to refute an argument that such equivalency does not exist.); Smithv.Hayashi, 209 USPQ 754 (Bd. of Pat. Inter. 1980) (The mere fact that phthalocyanine and selenium function as equivalent photoconductors in the claimed environment was not sufficient to establish that one would have been obvious over the other. However, there was evidence that both phthalocyanine and selenium were known photoconductors in the art of electrophotography. “This, in our view, presents strong evidence of obviousness in substituting one for the other in an electrophotographic environment as a photoconductor.” 209 USPQ at 759.).
An express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In reFout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). See MPEP 2144.06 (II).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement Child’s teachings of dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material in the device of Huang for the purpose of using a material that has high-k dielectric value, which allows for increasing the capacitance within a smaller physical space, which allows for increasing device density.
Huang does not explicitly teach
“the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate; and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate”.
A change in size or proportion is held to be an obvious matter of design choice. See In Gardnerv.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. See MPEP 2144.04.
In a similar field of endeavor Chang teaches
the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate (see e.g., the third capacitor plate has a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second capacitor plate, Para [0048], Figures 3D and 3H); and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate (see e.g., conductive structure 343b over and in contact with the third capacitor plate, Para [0052], Figure 3H).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement Chang’s teachings of the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate; and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate in the device of Huang as a mere change in size as per device requirements and to provide an electrical connection via the interconnect to the top electrode.
Regarding claim 2, Huang, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 1 as mentioned above. Huang does not explicitly teach
“wherein the perovskite high-k dielectric material is selected from the group consisting of SrTiO3, BaTiO3, and SrxBai-xTiO3”.
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches the perovskite high-k dielectric material is selected from the group consisting of SrTiO3, BaTiO3, and SrxBai-xTiO3 (see e.g., a capacitor dielectric material maybe a barium strontium titanate SrxBai-xTiO3 material, Para [0021]).
Applicant has not shown any unexpected results with perovskite or a non-perovskite dielectric material. In order to rely on equivalence as a rationale supporting an obviousness rejection, the equivalency must be recognized in the prior art, and cannot be based on applicant’s disclosure or the mere fact that the components at issue are functional or mechanical equivalents. In reRuff, 256 F.2d 590, 118 USPQ 340 (CCPA 1958) (The mere fact that components are claimed as members of a Markush group cannot be relied upon to establish the equivalency of these components. However, an applicant’s expressed recognition of an art-recognized or obvious equivalent may be used to refute an argument that such equivalency does not exist.); Smithv.Hayashi, 209 USPQ 754 (Bd. of Pat. Inter. 1980) (The mere fact that phthalocyanine and selenium function as equivalent photoconductors in the claimed environment was not sufficient to establish that one would have been obvious over the other. However, there was evidence that both phthalocyanine and selenium were known photoconductors in the art of electrophotography. “This, in our view, presents strong evidence of obviousness in substituting one for the other in an electrophotographic environment as a photoconductor.” 209 USPQ at 759.).
An express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In reFout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). See MPEP 2144.06 (II).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement Child’s teachings of dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material for the purpose of using a material that has high-k dielectric value, which allows for increasing the capacitance within a smaller physical space, which allows for increasing device density.
Regarding claim 3, Huang, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 1 as mentioned above. Huang further teaches wherein the second capacitor dielectric extends laterally beyond the first capacitor dielectric (see e.g., the dielectric layer 340 extends laterally beyond the dielectric layer 330 as shown in Figure 2H).
Regarding claim 4, Huang, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 1 as mentioned above. Huang further teaches wherein the first, second and third electrode plates are included in a dielectric material (see e.g., the bottom electrode 320, the middle electrode 332 and the top electrode 342 are included in a dielectric layer 246, Para [0060], Figure 2H).
Regarding claim 5, Huang, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 4 as mentioned above. Huang further teaches wherein the dielectric material is included in a back end of line (BEOL) metallization structure, the BEOL metallization structure above a plurality of integrated circuit devices (see e.g., the capacitor region 300 is configured to provide MIM capacitors formed thereon by in a back-end-of-line (BEOL) process. The non-capacitor region 310 is configured to provide device elements formed thereon including transistors (e.g., metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistors (MOSFET), complementary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS) transistors, bipolar junction transistors (BJT), high voltage transistors, high frequency transistors, p-channel and/or n channel field effect transistors (PFETs/NFETs), etc.), diodes, and/or other applicable elements. In some embodiments, the device elements are formed in the substrate 200 in a front-end-of-line (FEOL) process, Paras [0010], Figure 2H).
Regarding claim 6, Huang teaches a metal-insulator-metal (MIM) capacitor (see e.g., MIM capacitor structure 500B, Figure 2H), comprising:
a first electrode plate, the first electrode plate having a lateral width between a first end a second end (see e.g., bottom electrode layer 320 having a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Para [0050], Figure 2H);
a first capacitor dielectric on the first electrode plate, the first capacitor dielectric comprising a high-k dielectric material, wherein the first capacitor dielectric has a lateral width between a first end and a second end (see e.g., dielectric layer 330, equivalent to dielectric layer 230, is made of a high-k dielectric materials including oxides of Li, Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Sc, Y, Zr, Hf, Al, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, Lu, or another applicable material has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Paras [0024], [0051], Figure 2H), the first end of the first capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the first end of the first electrode plate, and the second end of the first capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the second end of the first electrode plate (see e.g., as shown in Figure 2H the first end of dielectric layer 330 is in vertical alignment with the first end of the bottom electrode layer 320, and the second end of the dielectric layer 330 is in vertical alignment with the second end of the bottom electrode layer 320)
a second electrode plate on the first capacitor dielectric, the second electrode plate having a portion over and parallel with the first electrode plate (see e.g., middle electrode layer 332 on the dielectric layer 330. The middle electrode layer 332 has a portion over and parallel to the bottom electrode layer 320, Para [0055], Figure 2H), and the second electrode plate having a lateral width between a first end a second end (see e.g., the middle electrode layer 332 has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Figure 2E), wherein the second electrode plate has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the first capacitor dielectric (see e.g., middle electrode layer 332 has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface 327 of the dielectric layer 330, Para [0051], Figure 2B; Examiner’s interpretation: the claim does not require the entirety of the bottommost surface of the second electrode plate to be above the uppermost surface of the first capacitor dielectric);
a second capacitor dielectric on the second electrode plate, the second capacitor dielectric comprising a non-perovskite high-k dielectric material (see e.g., dielectric layer 340 on the middle electrode layer 332 made of a high-k dielectric materials including oxides of Li, Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Sc, Y, Zr, Hf, Al, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, Lu, or another applicable material, Para [0055], Figure 2H), wherein the second capacitor dielectric has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, (see e.g., dielectric layer 340 has a lateral width between a first end and a second end 332, Figure 2E); the first end of the second capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the first end of the second electrode plate, and the second end of the second capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the second end of the second electrode plate (see e.g., as shown in Figure 2H the first end of the dielectric layer 340 is in vertical alignment with the first end of the middle electrode layer 332 and the second end of the dielectric layer 340 is in vertical alignment with the second end of the middle electrode layer 332), wherein the second capacitor dielectric has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the second electrode plate (see e.g., the dielectric layer 340 has a bottommost surface above the uppermost surface of the middle electrode layer 332; Examiner’s interpretation: the claim does not require the entirety of the bottommost surface of the second capacitor dielectric to be above the uppermost surface of the second electrode plate);
a third electrode plate on the second capacitor dielectric, the third electrode plate having a lateral width (see e.g., top electrode layer 342 on the dielectric layer 340. The top electrode layer 342 has a lateral width, Para [0059], Figure 2H), wherein the third electrode plate has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the second capacitor dielectric (see e.g., the top electrode layer 342 has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface 341 of the dielectric layer 340; Examiner’s interpretation: the claim does not require the entirety of the bottommost surface of the third electrode plate to be above the uppermost surface of the second capacitor dielectric);
Huang does not explicitly teach
“dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material”;
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches
dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material (see e.g., a capacitor dielectric maybe barium strontium titanate (BST), Paras [0020], [0021]; Examiner’s interpretation: Examiner’s interpretation: BST is an example of perovskite dielectric material, Para [0021]);
Applicant has not shown any unexpected results with perovskite or a non-perovskite dielectric material. In order to rely on equivalence as a rationale supporting an obviousness rejection, the equivalency must be recognized in the prior art, and cannot be based on applicant’s disclosure or the mere fact that the components at issue are functional or mechanical equivalents. In reRuff, 256 F.2d 590, 118 USPQ 340 (CCPA 1958) (The mere fact that components are claimed as members of a Markush group cannot be relied upon to establish the equivalency of these components. However, an applicant’s expressed recognition of an art-recognized or obvious equivalent may be used to refute an argument that such equivalency does not exist.); Smithv.Hayashi, 209 USPQ 754 (Bd. of Pat. Inter. 1980) (The mere fact that phthalocyanine and selenium function as equivalent photoconductors in the claimed environment was not sufficient to establish that one would have been obvious over the other. However, there was evidence that both phthalocyanine and selenium were known photoconductors in the art of electrophotography. “This, in our view, presents strong evidence of obviousness in substituting one for the other in an electrophotographic environment as a photoconductor.” 209 USPQ at 759.). An express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In reFout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). See MPEP 2144.06 (II).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement Child’s teachings of dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material in the device of Huang for the purpose of using a material that has high-k dielectric value, which allows for increasing the capacitance within a smaller physical space, which allows for increasing device density.
Huang does not explicitly teach
“the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate; and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate”.
A change in size or proportion is held to be an obvious matter of design choice. See In Gardnerv.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. See MPEP 2144.04.
In a similar field of endeavor Chang teaches
the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate (see e.g., the third capacitor plate has a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second capacitor plate, Para [0048], Figures 3D and 3H); and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate (see e.g., conductive structure 343b over and in contact with the third capacitor plate, Para [0052], Figure 3H).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement Chang’s teachings of the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate; and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate in the device of Huang as a mere change in size as per device requirements and to provide an electrical connection via the interconnect to the top electrode.
Regarding claim 7, Huang, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 6 as mentioned above. Huang does not explicitly teach
“wherein the perovskite high-k dielectric material is selected from the group consisting of SrTiO3, BaTiO3, and SrxBai-xTiO3”.
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches
wherein the perovskite high-k dielectric material is selected from the group consisting of SrTiO3, BaTiO3, and SrxBai-xTiO3 (see e.g., a capacitor dielectric maybe barium strontium titanate SrxBai-xTiO3, Paras [0020], [0021]);
Applicant has not shown any unexpected results with perovskite or a non-perovskite dielectric material. In order to rely on equivalence as a rationale supporting an obviousness rejection, the equivalency must be recognized in the prior art, and cannot be based on applicant’s disclosure or the mere fact that the components at issue are functional or mechanical equivalents. In reRuff, 256 F.2d 590, 118 USPQ 340 (CCPA 1958) (The mere fact that components are claimed as members of a Markush group cannot be relied upon to establish the equivalency of these components. However, an applicant’s expressed recognition of an art-recognized or obvious equivalent may be used to refute an argument that such equivalency does not exist.); Smithv.Hayashi, 209 USPQ 754 (Bd. of Pat. Inter. 1980) (The mere fact that phthalocyanine and selenium function as equivalent photoconductors in the claimed environment was not sufficient to establish that one would have been obvious over the other. However, there was evidence that both phthalocyanine and selenium were known photoconductors in the art of electrophotography. “This, in our view, presents strong evidence of obviousness in substituting one for the other in an electrophotographic environment as a photoconductor.” 209 USPQ at 759.).An express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In reFout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). See MPEP 2144.06 (II).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement Child’s teachings of dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material in the device of Huang for the purpose of using a material that has high-k dielectric value, which allows for increasing the capacitance within a smaller physical space, which allows for increasing device density.
Regarding claim 8, Huang, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 6 as mentioned above. Huang further teaches wherein the non-perovskite high-k dielectric material is selected from the group consisting of hafnium oxide, hafnium zirconium oxide, and hafnium aluminum oxide (see e.g., the high-k dielectric material includes oxides of Li, Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Sc, Y, Zr, Hf, Al, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, Lu, or another applicable material, Para [0024], Figure 2H).
Regarding claim 9, Huang, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 6 as mentioned above. Huang further teaches wherein the first, second and third electrode plates are included in a dielectric material (see e.g., the bottom electrode 320, the middle electrode 332 and the top electrode 342 are included in a dielectric layer 246, Para [0060], Figure 2H).
Regarding claim 10, Huang, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 9 as mentioned above. Huang further teaches wherein the dielectric material is included in a back end of line (BEOL) metallization structure, the BEOL metallization structure above a plurality of integrated circuit devices (see e.g., the capacitor region 300 is configured to provide MIM capacitors formed thereon by in a back-end-of-line (BEOL) process. The non-capacitor region 310 is configured to provide device elements formed thereon including transistors (e.g., metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistors (MOSFET), complementary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS) transistors, bipolar junction transistors (BJT), high voltage transistors, high frequency transistors, p-channel and/or n channel field effect transistors (PFETs/NFETs), etc.), diodes, and/or other applicable elements. In some embodiments, the device elements are formed in the substrate 200 in a front-end-of-line (FEOL) process, Paras [0010], Figure 2H).
Regarding claim 11, Huang teaches a metal-insulator-metal (MIM) capacitor (see e.g., MIM capacitor structure 500B, Figure 2H), comprising:
a first electrode plate, the first electrode plate having a lateral width between a first end a second end (see e.g., bottom electrode layer 320 having a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Para [0050], Figure 2H);
a first capacitor dielectric on the first electrode plate, the first capacitor dielectric comprising a high-k dielectric material, wherein the first capacitor dielectric has a lateral width between a first end and a second end (see e.g., dielectric layer 330, equivalent to dielectric layer 230, is made of a high-k dielectric materials including oxides of Li, Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Sc, Y, Zr, Hf, Al, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, Lu, or another applicable material has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Paras [0024], [0051], Figure 2H), the first end of the first capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the first end of the first electrode plate, and the second end of the first capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the second end of the first electrode plate (see e.g., as shown in Figure 2H the first end of dielectric layer 330 is in vertical alignment with the first end of the bottom electrode layer 320, and the second end of the dielectric layer 330 is in vertical alignment with the second end of the bottom electrode layer 320)
a second electrode plate on the first capacitor dielectric, the second electrode plate having a portion over and parallel with the first electrode plate (see e.g., middle electrode layer 332 on the dielectric layer 330. The middle electrode layer 332 has a portion over and parallel to the bottom electrode layer 320, Para [0055], Figure 2H), and the second electrode plate having a lateral width between a first end a second end (see e.g., the middle electrode layer 332 has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Figure 2E), wherein the second electrode plate has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the first capacitor dielectric (see e.g., middle electrode layer 332 has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface 327 of the dielectric layer 330, Para [0051], Figure 2B; Examiner’s interpretation: the claim does not require the entirety of the bottommost surface of the second electrode plate to be above the uppermost surface of the first capacitor dielectric);
a second capacitor dielectric on the second electrode plate, the second capacitor dielectric comprising the high-k dielectric material (see e.g., dielectric layer 340 on the middle electrode layer 332 made of a high-k dielectric materials including oxides of Li, Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Sc, Y, Zr, Hf, Al, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, Lu, or another applicable material, Para [0055], Figure 2H), wherein the second capacitor dielectric has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, (see e.g., dielectric layer 340 has a lateral width between a first end and a second end 332, Figure 2E); the first end of the second capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the first end of the second electrode plate, and the second end of the second capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the second end of the second electrode plate (see e.g., as shown in Figure 2H the first end of the dielectric layer 340 is in vertical alignment with the first end of the middle electrode layer 332 and the second end of the dielectric layer 340 is in vertical alignment with the second end of the middle electrode layer 332), wherein the second capacitor dielectric has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the second electrode plate (see e.g., the dielectric layer 340 has a bottommost surface above the uppermost surface of the middle electrode layer 332; Examiner’s interpretation: the claim does not require the entirety of the bottommost surface of the second capacitor dielectric to be above the uppermost surface of the second electrode plate);
a third electrode plate on the second capacitor dielectric, the third electrode plate having a lateral width (see e.g., top electrode layer 342 on the dielectric layer 340. The top electrode layer 342 has a lateral width, Para [0059], Figure 2H), wherein the third electrode plate has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the second capacitor dielectric (see e.g., the top electrode layer 342 has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface 341 of the dielectric layer 340; Examiner’s interpretation: the claim does not require the entirety of the bottommost surface of the third electrode plate to be above the uppermost surface of the second capacitor dielectric);
Huang does not explicitly teach
“dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material,”
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material (see e.g., a capacitor dielectric material maybe a barium strontium titanate (BST) material; Examiner’s interpretation: BST is an example of perovskite dielectric material, Para [0021]).
Applicant has not shown any unexpected results with perovskite or a non-perovskite dielectric material. In order to rely on equivalence as a rationale supporting an obviousness rejection, the equivalency must be recognized in the prior art, and cannot be based on applicant’s disclosure or the mere fact that the components at issue are functional or mechanical equivalents. In reRuff, 256 F.2d 590, 118 USPQ 340 (CCPA 1958) (The mere fact that components are claimed as members of a Markush group cannot be relied upon to establish the equivalency of these components. However, an applicant’s expressed recognition of an art-recognized or obvious equivalent may be used to refute an argument that such equivalency does not exist.); Smithv.Hayashi, 209 USPQ 754 (Bd. of Pat. Inter. 1980) (The mere fact that phthalocyanine and selenium function as equivalent photoconductors in the claimed environment was not sufficient to establish that one would have been obvious over the other. However, there was evidence that both phthalocyanine and selenium were known photoconductors in the art of electrophotography. “This, in our view, presents strong evidence of obviousness in substituting one for the other in an electrophotographic environment as a photoconductor.” 209 USPQ at 759.).
An express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In reFout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). See MPEP 2144.06 (II).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement Child’s teachings of dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material in the device of Huang for the purpose of using a material that has high-k dielectric value, which allows for increasing the capacitance within a smaller physical space, which allows for increasing device density.
Huang does not explicitly teach
“a board; and
a component coupled to the board, the component including a metal-insulator- metal (MIM) capacitor”
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches a board; and
a component coupled to the board, the component including a metal-insulator- metal (MIM) capacitor (see e.g., electronic system 1000, a computing device comprising MIM capacitor. A foundation substrate 1090 may be part of the computing system 1000. The foundation substrate 1090 is a motherboard that supports an apparatus that includes an on-chip capacitor i.e., the MIM capacitor, Para [0111], Figure 10).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively field to implement Childs’ teachings of a computing device comprising a MIM capacitor coupled to a board in the device of Huang so that it can serve to form an electronic device such as PC, DVD player or a mobile device.
Huang does not explicitly teach
“the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate; and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate”.
A change in size or proportion is held to be an obvious matter of design choice. See In Gardnerv.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. See MPEP 2144.04.
In a similar field of endeavor Chang teaches
the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate (see e.g., the third capacitor plate has a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second capacitor plate, Para [0048], Figures 3D and 3H); and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate (see e.g., conductive structure 343b over and in contact with the third capacitor plate, Para [0052], Figure 3H).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement Chang’s teachings of the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate; and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate in the device of Huang as a mere change in size as per device requirements and to provide an electrical connection via the interconnect to the top electrode.
Regarding claim 12, Huang, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 11 as mentioned above. Huang does not explicitly teach
“further comprising: a memory coupled to the board”.
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches a memory coupled to the board (see e.g., the processor 1010 includes on-die memory 1016. The dual integrated circuit 1011 includes on-die memory 1017. The electronic system includes an external memory 1040, Paras [0105]-[0109], Figure 10).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively field to implement Childs’ teachings of a memory coupled to a board in the device of Huang so that it can serve to form an electronic device such as PC, DVD player or a mobile device.
Regarding claim 13, Huang, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 11 as mentioned above. Huang does not explicitly teach
“further comprising: a communication chip coupled to the board”.
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches a communication chip coupled to the board (see e.g., the integrated circuit 1010 includes a communication circuit 1014. The dual integrated circuit 1011 includes a dual communications circuit 1015, Paras [0105]-[0106], Figure 10).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively field to implement Childs’ teachings of a communication chip coupled to a board in the device of Huang so that it can serve to form an electronic device such as PC, DVD player or a mobile device.
Regarding claim 14, Huang, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 11 as mentioned above. Huang does not explicitly teach
“further comprising: a camera coupled to the board”.
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches a camera coupled to the board (see e.g., input device 1070 includes a camera, Para [0110], Figure 10).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively field to implement Childs’ teachings of a camera coupled to a board in the device of Huang so that it can serve to form an electronic device such as PC, DVD player or a mobile device.
Regarding claim 15, Huang, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 11 as mentioned above. Huang does not explicitly teach
“wherein the component is a packaged integrated circuit die”.
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches wherein the component is a packaged integrated circuit die (see e.g., the computer system 1000 includes an on-chip capacitor, Para [0103], Figures 9 and 10).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively field to implement Childs’ teachings of on-chip capacitor in the device of Huang so that it can serve to form an electronic device such as PC, DVD player or a mobile device.
Regarding claim 16, Huang teaches a metal-insulator-metal (MIM) capacitor (see e.g., MIM capacitor structure 500B, Figure 2H), comprising:
a first electrode plate, the first electrode plate having a lateral width between a first end a second end (see e.g., bottom electrode layer 320 having a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Para [0050], Figure 2H);
a first capacitor dielectric on the first electrode plate, the first capacitor dielectric comprising a high-k dielectric material, wherein the first capacitor dielectric has a lateral width between a first end and a second end (see e.g., dielectric layer 330, equivalent to dielectric layer 230, is made of a high-k dielectric materials including oxides of Li, Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Sc, Y, Zr, Hf, Al, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, Lu, or another applicable material has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Paras [0024], [0051], Figure 2H), the first end of the first capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the first end of the first electrode plate, and the second end of the first capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the second end of the first electrode plate (see e.g., as shown in Figure 2H the first end of dielectric layer 330 is in vertical alignment with the first end of the bottom electrode layer 320, and the second end of the dielectric layer 330 is in vertical alignment with the second end of the bottom electrode layer 320)
a second electrode plate on the first capacitor dielectric, the second electrode plate having a portion over and parallel with the first electrode plate (see e.g., middle electrode layer 332 on the dielectric layer 330. The middle electrode layer 332 has a portion over and parallel to the bottom electrode layer 320, Para [0055], Figure 2H), and the second electrode plate having a lateral width between a first end a second end (see e.g., the middle electrode layer 332 has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Figure 2E), wherein the second electrode plate has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the first capacitor dielectric (see e.g., middle electrode layer 332 has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface 327 of the dielectric layer 330, Para [0051], Figure 2B; Examiner’s interpretation: the claim does not require the entirety of the bottommost surface of the second electrode plate to be above the uppermost surface of the first capacitor dielectric);
a second capacitor dielectric on the second electrode plate, the second capacitor dielectric comprising a non-perovskite high-k dielectric material (see e.g., dielectric layer 340 on the middle electrode layer 332 made of a high-k dielectric materials including oxides of Li, Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Sc, Y, Zr, Hf, Al, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, Lu, or another applicable material, Para [0055], Figure 2H), wherein the second capacitor dielectric has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, (see e.g., dielectric layer 340 has a lateral width between a first end and a second end 332, Figure 2E); the first end of the second capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the first end of the second electrode plate, and the second end of the second capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the second end of the second electrode plate (see e.g., as shown in Figure 2H the first end of the dielectric layer 340 is in vertical alignment with the first end of the middle electrode layer 332 and the second end of the dielectric layer 340 is in vertical alignment with the second end of the middle electrode layer 332), wherein the second capacitor dielectric has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the second electrode plate (see e.g., the dielectric layer 340 has a bottommost surface above the uppermost surface of the middle electrode layer 332; Examiner’s interpretation: the claim does not require the entirety of the bottommost surface of the second capacitor dielectric to be above the uppermost surface of the second electrode plate);
a third electrode plate on the second capacitor dielectric, the third electrode plate having a lateral width (see e.g., top electrode layer 342 on the dielectric layer 340. The top electrode layer 342 has a lateral width, Para [0059], Figure 2H), wherein the third electrode plate has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the second capacitor dielectric (see e.g., the top electrode layer 342 has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface 341 of the dielectric layer 340; Examiner’s interpretation: the claim does not require the entirety of the bottommost surface of the third electrode plate to be above the uppermost surface of the second capacitor dielectric);
Huang does not explicitly teach
“dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material”;
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches
dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material (see e.g., a capacitor dielectric maybe barium strontium titanate, Paras [0020], [0021]; Examiner’s interpretation: BST is an example of perovskite dielectric material, Para [0021]);
Applicant has not shown any unexpected results with perovskite or a non-perovskite dielectric material. In order to rely on equivalence as a rationale supporting an obviousness rejection, the equivalency must be recognized in the prior art, and cannot be based on applicant’s disclosure or the mere fact that the components at issue are functional or mechanical equivalents. In reRuff, 256 F.2d 590, 118 USPQ 340 (CCPA 1958) (The mere fact that components are claimed as members of a Markush group cannot be relied upon to establish the equivalency of these components. However, an applicant’s expressed recognition of an art-recognized or obvious equivalent may be used to refute an argument that such equivalency does not exist.); Smithv.Hayashi, 209 USPQ 754 (Bd. of Pat. Inter. 1980) (The mere fact that phthalocyanine and selenium function as equivalent photoconductors in the claimed environment was not sufficient to establish that one would have been obvious over the other. However, there was evidence that both phthalocyanine and selenium were known photoconductors in the art of electrophotography. “This, in our view, presents strong evidence of obviousness in substituting one for the other in an electrophotographic environment as a photoconductor.” 209 USPQ at 759.).
An express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In reFout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). See MPEP 2144.06 (II).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement Child’s teachings of dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material in the device of Huang for the purpose of using a material that has high-k dielectric value, which allows for increasing the capacitance within a smaller physical space, which allows for increasing device density.
Huang does not explicitly teach
“a board; and
a component coupled to the board, the component including a metal-insulator- metal (MIM) capacitor”
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches a board; and
a component coupled to the board, the component including a metal-insulator- metal (MIM) capacitor (see e.g., electronic system 1000, a computing device comprising MIM capacitor. A foundation substrate 1090 may be part of the computing system 1000. The foundation substrate 1090 is a motherboard that supports an apparatus that includes an on-chip capacitor i.e., the MIM capacitor, Para [0111], Figure 10).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively field to implement Childs’ teachings of a computing device comprising a MIM capacitor coupled to a board in the device of Huang so that it can serve to form an electronic device such as PC, DVD player or a mobile device.
Huang does not explicitly teach
“the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate; and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate”.
A change in size or proportion is held to be an obvious matter of design choice. See In Gardnerv.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. See MPEP 2144.04.
In a similar field of endeavor Chang teaches
the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate (see e.g., the third capacitor plate has a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second capacitor plate, Para [0048], Figures 3D and 3H); and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate (see e.g., conductive structure 343b over and in contact with the third capacitor plate, Para [0052], Figure 3H).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement Chang’s teachings of the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate; and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate in the device of Huang as a mere change in size as per device requirements and to provide an electrical connection via the interconnect to the top electrode.
Regarding claim 17, Huang, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 16 as mentioned above. Huang does not explicitly teach
“further comprising: a memory coupled to the board”.
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches a memory coupled to the board (see e.g., the processor 1010 includes on-die memory 1016. The dual integrated circuit 1011 includes on-die memory 1017. The electronic system includes an external memory 1040, Paras [0105]-[0109], Figure 10).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively field to implement Child’s teachings of a memory coupled to a board in the device of Huang so that it can serve to form an electronic device such as PC, DVD player or a mobile device.
Regarding claim 18, Huang, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 16 as mentioned above. Huang does not explicitly teach
“further comprising: a communication chip coupled to the board”.
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches a communication chip coupled to the board (see e.g., the integrated circuit 1010 includes a communication circuit 1014. The dual integrated circuit 1011 includes a dual communications circuit 1015, Paras [0105]-[0106], Figure 10).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively field to implement Childs’ teachings of a communication chip coupled to a board in the device of Huang so that it can serve to form an electronic device such as PC, DVD player or a mobile device.
Regarding claim 19, Huang, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 16 as mentioned above. Huang does not explicitly teach
“further comprising: a camera coupled to the board”.
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches a camera coupled to the board (see e.g., input device 1070 includes a camera, Para [0110], Figure 10).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively field to implement Childs’ teachings of a camera coupled to a board in the device of Huang so that it can serve to form an electronic device such as PC, DVD player or a mobile device.
Regarding claim 20, Huang, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 16 as mentioned above. Huang does not explicitly teach
“wherein the component is a packaged integrated circuit die”.
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches wherein the component is a packaged integrated circuit die (see e.g., the computer system 1000 includes an on-chip capacitor, Para [0103], Figures 9 and 10).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively field to implement Childs’ teachings of an on-chip capacitor in the device of Huang so that it can serve to form an electronic device such as PC, DVD player or a mobile device.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ando et al. (US 9,761,655 B1; hereafter Ando) in view of Childs et al. (US 2013/0270675 A1; hereafter Childs) and further in view of Chang et al. (US 2012/0319239 A1; hereafter Chang).
Regarding claim 1, Ando teaches a metal-insulator-metal (MIM) capacitor (see e.g., stacked planar capacitor structure 200, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14), comprising:
A rearrangement of parts is held to be an obvious matter of design choice. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); See also In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice).
Ando teaches a similar structure as the instant application, only difference being the electrode plates and capacitor dielectrics being arranged in a reverse order as shown in Figure 14.
Moving from top to bottom in Figure 14, the bottom electrode 116 could be considered as the first electrode plate, high-k dielectric layer 114 as the first capacitor dielectric, top electrode 110 as the second electrode plate, high-k dielectric 108 as the second capacitor dielectric and the bottom electrode 104 as the third electrode plate.
PNG
media_image1.png
416
1023
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Modified Figure 14 (Ando)
a first electrode plate, the first electrode plate having a lateral width between a first end a second end (see e.g., bottom electrode 116 has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14);
a first capacitor dielectric on the first electrode plate, the first capacitor dielectric comprising a high-k dielectric material, wherein the first capacitor dielectric has a lateral width between a first end and a second end (see e.g., high-k dielectric layer 114 has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14);, the first end of the capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the first end of the first electrode plate, and the second end of the capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the second end of the first electrode plate (see e.g., as shown in modified Figure 14 the first end of the high-k dielectric layer 114 is in vertical alignment with the first end of the bottom electrode 116, and the second end of the high-k dielectric layer 114 is in vertical alignment with the second end of the bottom electrode 116)
a second electrode plate on the first capacitor dielectric, the second electrode plate having a portion over and parallel with the first electrode plate, and the second electrode plate having a lateral width between a first end second end, (see e.g., top electrode 110, having a lateral width between a first end and a second end, having a portion on top and parallel with the bottom electrode 116, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14), wherein the second electrode has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the first capacitor dielectric ( see e.g., top electrode 110 has a bottommost surface above the uppermost surface of the high-k dielectric layer 114 as shown in the modified Figure 14, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14);
a second capacitor dielectric on the second electrode plate, the second capacitor dielectric comprising the high-k dielectric material (see e.g., high-k dielectric layer 108 on the top electrode 110, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14), wherein the second capacitor dielectric has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, (see e.g., the high-k dielectric layer 108 has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14), the first end of the second capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the first end of the second electrode plate, and the and the second end of the second capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the second end of the second electrode plate (see e.g., as shown in modified Figure 14 the first end of the high-k dielectric layer 108 is in vertical alignment with the first end of the top electrode 110, and the second end of the high-k dielectric layer 108 is in vertical alignment with the second end of the top electrode 110), wherein the second capacitor dielectric has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the second electrode plate (see e.g., high-k dielectric layer 108 has a bottommost surface above the uppermost surface of the top electrode 110 as shown in the modified Figure 14);
a third electrode plate on the second capacitor dielectric, the third electrode plate having a lateral width (see e.g., bottom electrode 104, with a lateral width, on the high-k dielectric layer 108 having a portion over and parallel with the top electrode 110, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14), wherein the third electrode plate has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the second capacitor dielectric (see e.g., as shown in modified Figure 14 the bottom electrode 104 has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the high-k dielectric layer 108)
Ando does not explicitly teach
“dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material,”
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches
dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material (see e.g., a capacitor dielectric material maybe a barium strontium titanate (BST) material; Examiner’s interpretation: BST is an example of perovskite dielectric material, Para [0021]).
Applicant has not shown any unexpected results with perovskite or a non-perovskite dielectric material. In order to rely on equivalence as a rationale supporting an obviousness rejection, the equivalency must be recognized in the prior art, and cannot be based on applicant’s disclosure or the mere fact that the components at issue are functional or mechanical equivalents. In reRuff, 256 F.2d 590, 118 USPQ 340 (CCPA 1958) (The mere fact that components are claimed as members of a Markush group cannot be relied upon to establish the equivalency of these components. However, an applicant’s expressed recognition of an art-recognized or obvious equivalent may be used to refute an argument that such equivalency does not exist.); Smithv.Hayashi, 209 USPQ 754 (Bd. of Pat. Inter. 1980) (The mere fact that phthalocyanine and selenium function as equivalent photoconductors in the claimed environment was not sufficient to establish that one would have been obvious over the other. However, there was evidence that both phthalocyanine and selenium were known photoconductors in the art of electrophotography. “This, in our view, presents strong evidence of obviousness in substituting one for the other in an electrophotographic environment as a photoconductor.” 209 USPQ at 759.).
An express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In reFout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). See MPEP 2144.06 (II).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement Child’s teachings of dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material in the device of Ando for the purpose of using a material that has high-k dielectric value, which allows for increasing the capacitance within a smaller physical space, which allows for increasing device density.
Ando does not explicitly teach
“the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate; and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate”.
A change in size or proportion is held to be an obvious matter of design choice. See In Gardnerv.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. See MPEP 2144.04.
In a similar field of endeavor Chang teaches
the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate (see e.g., the third capacitor plate has a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second capacitor plate, Para [0048], Figures 3D and 3H); and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate (see e.g., conductive structure 343b over and in contact with the third capacitor plate, Para [0052], Figure 3H).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement Chang’s teachings of the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate; and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate in the device of Ando as a mere change in size as per device requirements and to provide an electrical connection via the interconnect to the top electrode.
Regarding claim 2, Ando, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 1 as mentioned above. Ando does not explicitly teach
“wherein the perovskite high-k dielectric material is selected from the group consisting of SrTiO3, BaTiO3, and SrxBai-xTiO3”.
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material (see e.g., a capacitor dielectric material maybe a barium strontium titanate SrxBai-xTiO3 material, Para [0021]).
Applicant has not shown any unexpected results with perovskite or a non-perovskite dielectric material. In order to rely on equivalence as a rationale supporting an obviousness rejection, the equivalency must be recognized in the prior art, and cannot be based on applicant’s disclosure or the mere fact that the components at issue are functional or mechanical equivalents. In reRuff, 256 F.2d 590, 118 USPQ 340 (CCPA 1958) (The mere fact that components are claimed as members of a Markush group cannot be relied upon to establish the equivalency of these components. However, an applicant’s expressed recognition of an art-recognized or obvious equivalent may be used to refute an argument that such equivalency does not exist.); Smithv.Hayashi, 209 USPQ 754 (Bd. of Pat. Inter. 1980) (The mere fact that phthalocyanine and selenium function as equivalent photoconductors in the claimed environment was not sufficient to establish that one would have been obvious over the other. However, there was evidence that both phthalocyanine and selenium were known photoconductors in the art of electrophotography. “This, in our view, presents strong evidence of obviousness in substituting one for the other in an electrophotographic environment as a photoconductor.” 209 USPQ at 759.).
An express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In reFout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). See MPEP 2144.06 (II).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement Child’s teachings of dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material in the device of Ando for the purpose of using a material that has high-k dielectric value, which allows for increasing the capacitance within a smaller physical space, which allows for increasing device density.
Regarding claim 3, Ando, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 1 as mentioned above. Ando further teaches wherein the second capacitor dielectric extends laterally beyond the first capacitor dielectric (see e.g., the high-k dielectric layer 108 extends laterally beyond the first high-k dielectric layer 114, Figure 14).
Regarding claim 4, Ando, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 1 as mentioned above. Ando further teaches wherein the first, second and third electrode plates are included in a dielectric material (see e.g., the bottom electrode 116, the top electrode 110 and the bottom electrode 104 are included in a dielectric layer 102 layer and dielectric layer 120 which is similar or same as dielectric layer 102, Column 7, Lines 49-53, Figure 14).
Regarding claim 5, Ando, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 4 as mentioned above. Ando further teaches wherein the dielectric material is included in a back end of line (BEOL) metallization structure, the BEOL metallization structure above a plurality of integrated circuit devices (see e.g., The dielectric layer 102 may be any interlevel or intralevel dielectrics utilized at the back end of line (BEOL). As used herein, BEOL generally begins when the first layer of metal is deposited on the wafer. As such, BEOL typically includes contacts, insulating layers, metal levels, and bonding sites for chip-to-package connections. The dielectric layer 120 may be any one of the interlevel or intralevel dielectrics typically utilized at the back end of line (BEOL), Column 4, Lines 30-40, Column 7, Lines 49-53).
Regarding claim 6, Ando teaches a metal-insulator-metal (MIM) capacitor (see e.g., stacked planar capacitor structure 200, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14), comprising:
A rearrangement of parts is held to be an obvious matter of design choice. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); See also In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice).
Ando teaches a similar structure as the instant application, only difference being the electrode plates and capacitor dielectrics being arranged in a reverse order as shown in Figure 14.
Moving from top to bottom in Figure 14, the bottom electrode 116 could be considered as the first electrode plate, high-k dielectric layer 114 as the first capacitor dielectric, top electrode 110 as the second electrode plate, high-k dielectric 108 as the second capacitor dielectric and the bottom electrode 104 as the third electrode plate.
a first electrode plate, the first electrode plate having a lateral width between a first end a second end (see e.g., bottom electrode 116 has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14);
a first capacitor dielectric on the first electrode plate, the first capacitor dielectric comprising a high-k dielectric material, wherein the first capacitor dielectric has a lateral width between a first end and a second end (see e.g., high-k dielectric layer 114 has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14);, the first end of the capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the first end of the first electrode plate, and the second end of the capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the second end of the first electrode plate (see e.g., as shown in modified Figure 14 the first end of the high-k dielectric layer 114 is in vertical alignment with the first end of the bottom electrode 116, and the second end of the high-k dielectric layer 114 is in vertical alignment with the second end of the bottom electrode 116)
a second electrode plate on the first capacitor dielectric, the second electrode plate having a portion over and parallel with the first electrode plate, and the second electrode plate having a lateral width between a first end second end, (see e.g., top electrode 110, having a lateral width between a first end and a second end, having a portion on top and parallel with the bottom electrode 116, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14), wherein the second electrode has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the first capacitor dielectric ( see e.g., top electrode 110 has a bottommost surface above the uppermost surface of the high-k dielectric layer 114 as shown in the modified Figure 14, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14);
a second capacitor dielectric on the second electrode plate, the second capacitor dielectric comprising a non-perovskite high-k dielectric material (see e.g., high-k dielectric layer 108 on the top electrode 110. Materials suitable for the high-k dielectric layer include, but are not limited to, oxide-nitride-oxide, SiO.sub.2, Ta.sub.2O.sub.5, Si.sub.3N.sub.4, SiON, ZrO.sub.2, HfO.sub.2, HfSiO.sub.2, Al.sub.2O.sub.3, and any combination of two or more of the foregoing materials, Column 7, Lines 16-23, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14), wherein the second capacitor dielectric has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, (see e.g., the high-k dielectric layer 108 has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14), the first end of the second capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the first end of the second electrode plate, and the and the second end of the second capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the second end of the second electrode plate (see e.g., as shown in modified Figure 14 the first end of the high-k dielectric layer 108 is in vertical alignment with the first end of the top electrode 110, and the second end of the high-k dielectric layer 108 is in vertical alignment with the second end of the top electrode 110), wherein the second capacitor dielectric has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the second electrode plate (see e.g., high-k dielectric layer 108 has a bottommost surface above the uppermost surface of the top electrode 110 as shown in the modified Figure 14);
a third electrode plate on the second capacitor dielectric, the third electrode plate having a lateral width (see e.g., bottom electrode 104, with a lateral width, on the high-k dielectric layer 108 having a portion over and parallel with the top electrode 110, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14), wherein the third electrode plate has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the second capacitor dielectric (see e.g., as shown in modified Figure 14 the bottom electrode 104 has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the high-k dielectric layer 108)
Ando does not explicitly teach
“dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material”;
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches
dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material (see e.g., a capacitor dielectric maybe barium strontium titanate, Paras [0020], [0021]; Examiner’s interpretation: BST is an example of perovskite dielectric material, Para [0021]);
Applicant has not shown any unexpected results with perovskite or a non-perovskite dielectric material. In order to rely on equivalence as a rationale supporting an obviousness rejection, the equivalency must be recognized in the prior art, and cannot be based on applicant’s disclosure or the mere fact that the components at issue are functional or mechanical equivalents. In reRuff, 256 F.2d 590, 118 USPQ 340 (CCPA 1958) (The mere fact that components are claimed as members of a Markush group cannot be relied upon to establish the equivalency of these components. However, an applicant’s expressed recognition of an art-recognized or obvious equivalent may be used to refute an argument that such equivalency does not exist.); Smithv.Hayashi, 209 USPQ 754 (Bd. of Pat. Inter. 1980) (The mere fact that phthalocyanine and selenium function as equivalent photoconductors in the claimed environment was not sufficient to establish that one would have been obvious over the other. However, there was evidence that both phthalocyanine and selenium were known photoconductors in the art of electrophotography. “This, in our view, presents strong evidence of obviousness in substituting one for the other in an electrophotographic environment as a photoconductor.” 209 USPQ at 759.). An express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In reFout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). See MPEP 2144.06 (II).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement Child’s teachings of dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material in the device of Ando for the purpose of using a material that has high-k dielectric value, which allows for increasing the capacitance within a smaller physical space, which allows for increasing device density.
Ando does not explicitly teach
“the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate; and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate”.
A change in size or proportion is held to be an obvious matter of design choice. See In Gardnerv.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. See MPEP 2144.04.
In a similar field of endeavor Chang teaches
the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate (see e.g., the third capacitor plate has a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second capacitor plate, Para [0048], Figures 3D and 3H); and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate (see e.g., conductive structure 343b over and in contact with the third capacitor plate, Para [0052], Figure 3H).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement Chang’s teachings of the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate; and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate in the device of Ando as a mere change in size as per device requirements and to provide an electrical connection via the interconnect to the top electrode.
Regarding claim 7, Ando, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 6 as mentioned above. Ando does not explicitly teach
“wherein the perovskite high-k dielectric material is selected from the group consisting of SrTiO3, BaTiO3, and SrxBai-xTiO3”.
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches
wherein the perovskite high-k dielectric material is selected from the group consisting of SrTiO3, BaTiO3, and SrxBai-xTiO3 (see e.g., a capacitor dielectric maybe barium strontium titanate SrxBai-xTiO3, Paras [0020], [0021]);
Applicant has not shown any unexpected results with perovskite or a non-perovskite dielectric material. In order to rely on equivalence as a rationale supporting an obviousness rejection, the equivalency must be recognized in the prior art, and cannot be based on applicant’s disclosure or the mere fact that the components at issue are functional or mechanical equivalents. In reRuff, 256 F.2d 590, 118 USPQ 340 (CCPA 1958) (The mere fact that components are claimed as members of a Markush group cannot be relied upon to establish the equivalency of these components. However, an applicant’s expressed recognition of an art-recognized or obvious equivalent may be used to refute an argument that such equivalency does not exist.); Smithv.Hayashi, 209 USPQ 754 (Bd. of Pat. Inter. 1980) (The mere fact that phthalocyanine and selenium function as equivalent photoconductors in the claimed environment was not sufficient to establish that one would have been obvious over the other. However, there was evidence that both phthalocyanine and selenium were known photoconductors in the art of electrophotography. “This, in our view, presents strong evidence of obviousness in substituting one for the other in an electrophotographic environment as a photoconductor.” 209 USPQ at 759.).An express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In reFout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). See MPEP 2144.06 (II).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement Child’s teachings of dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material in the device of Ando for the purpose of using a material that has high-k dielectric value, which allows for increasing the capacitance within a smaller physical space, which allows for increasing device density.
Regarding claim 8, Ando, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 6 as mentioned above. Ando further teaches
wherein the non-perovskite high-k dielectric material is selected from the group consisting of hafnium oxide, hafnium zirconium oxide, and hafnium aluminum oxide (see e.g., Materials suitable for the first high-k dielectric layer 108 include, but are not limited to, oxide-nitride-oxide, SiO.sub.2, Ta.sub.2O.sub.5, Si.sub.3N.sub.4, SiON, ZrO.sub.2, ZrAlO, ZrSiO, HfAlO, HfO.sub.2, HfSiO.sub.2, Al.sub.2O.sub.3, and any combination of two or more of the foregoing materials, Column 6, Lines 14-20, Figure 14).
Regarding claim 9, Ando, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 6 as mentioned above. Ando further teaches
wherein the first, second and third electrode plates are included in a dielectric material (see e.g., the bottom electrode 116, the top electrode 110 and the bottom electrode 104 are included in a dielectric layer 102 layer and dielectric layer 120 which is similar or same as dielectric layer 102, Column 7, Lines 49-53, Figure 14).
Regarding claim 10, Ando, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 19 as mentioned above. Ando further teaches wherein the dielectric material is included in a back end of line (BEOL) metallization structure, the BEOL metallization structure above a plurality of integrated circuit devices (see e.g., The dielectric layer 102 may be any interlevel or intralevel dielectrics utilized at the back end of line (BEOL). As used herein, BEOL generally begins when the first layer of metal is deposited on the wafer. As such, BEOL typically includes contacts, insulating layers, metal levels, and bonding sites for chip-to-package connections. The dielectric layer 120 may be any one of the interlevel or intralevel dielectrics typically utilized at the back end of line (BEOL), Column 4, Lines 30-40, Column 7, Lines 49-53).
Regarding claim 11, Ando teaches a metal-insulator-metal (MIM) capacitor (see e.g., stacked planar capacitor structure 200, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14), comprising:
A rearrangement of parts is held to be an obvious matter of design choice. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); See also In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice).
Ando teaches a similar structure as the instant application, only difference being the electrode plates and capacitor dielectrics being arranged in a reverse order as shown in Figure 14.
Moving from top to bottom in Figure 14, the bottom electrode 116 could be considered as the first electrode plate, high-k dielectric layer 114 as the first capacitor dielectric, top electrode 110 as the second electrode plate, high-k dielectric 108 as the second capacitor dielectric and the bottom electrode 104 as the third electrode plate.
a first electrode plate, the first electrode plate having a lateral width between a first end a second end (see e.g., bottom electrode 116 has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14);
a first capacitor dielectric on the first electrode plate, the first capacitor dielectric comprising a high-k dielectric material, wherein the first capacitor dielectric has a lateral width between a first end and a second end (see e.g., high-k dielectric layer 114 has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14);, the first end of the capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the first end of the first electrode plate, and the second end of the capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the second end of the first electrode plate (see e.g., as shown in modified Figure 14 the first end of the high-k dielectric layer 114 is in vertical alignment with the first end of the bottom electrode 116, and the second end of the high-k dielectric layer 114 is in vertical alignment with the second end of the bottom electrode 116)
a second electrode plate on the first capacitor dielectric, the second electrode plate having a portion over and parallel with the first electrode plate, and the second electrode plate having a lateral width between a first end second end, (see e.g., top electrode 110, having a lateral width between a first end and a second end, having a portion on top and parallel with the bottom electrode 116, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14), wherein the second electrode has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the first capacitor dielectric ( see e.g., top electrode 110 has a bottommost surface above the uppermost surface of the high-k dielectric layer 114 as shown in the modified Figure 14, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14);
a second capacitor dielectric on the second electrode plate, the second capacitor dielectric comprising the high-k dielectric material (see e.g., high-k dielectric layer 108 on the top electrode 110, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14), wherein the second capacitor dielectric has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, (see e.g., the high-k dielectric layer 108 has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14), the first end of the second capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the first end of the second electrode plate, and the and the second end of the second capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the second end of the second electrode plate (see e.g., as shown in modified Figure 14 the first end of the high-k dielectric layer 108 is in vertical alignment with the first end of the top electrode 110, and the second end of the high-k dielectric layer 108 is in vertical alignment with the second end of the top electrode 110), wherein the second capacitor dielectric has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the second electrode plate (see e.g., high-k dielectric layer 108 has a bottommost surface above the uppermost surface of the top electrode 110 as shown in the modified Figure 14);
a third electrode plate on the second capacitor dielectric, the third electrode plate having a lateral width (see e.g., bottom electrode 104, with a lateral width, on the high-k dielectric layer 108 having a portion over and parallel with the top electrode 110, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14), wherein the third electrode plate has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the second capacitor dielectric (see e.g., as shown in modified Figure 14 the bottom electrode 104 has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the high-k dielectric layer 108)
Ando does not explicitly teach
“dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material,”
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material (see e.g., a capacitor dielectric material maybe a barium strontium titanate (BST) material; Examiner’s interpretation: BST is an example of perovskite dielectric material, Para [0021]).
Applicant has not shown any unexpected results with perovskite or a non-perovskite dielectric material. In order to rely on equivalence as a rationale supporting an obviousness rejection, the equivalency must be recognized in the prior art, and cannot be based on applicant’s disclosure or the mere fact that the components at issue are functional or mechanical equivalents. In reRuff, 256 F.2d 590, 118 USPQ 340 (CCPA 1958) (The mere fact that components are claimed as members of a Markush group cannot be relied upon to establish the equivalency of these components. However, an applicant’s expressed recognition of an art-recognized or obvious equivalent may be used to refute an argument that such equivalency does not exist.); Smithv.Hayashi, 209 USPQ 754 (Bd. of Pat. Inter. 1980) (The mere fact that phthalocyanine and selenium function as equivalent photoconductors in the claimed environment was not sufficient to establish that one would have been obvious over the other. However, there was evidence that both phthalocyanine and selenium were known photoconductors in the art of electrophotography. “This, in our view, presents strong evidence of obviousness in substituting one for the other in an electrophotographic environment as a photoconductor.” 209 USPQ at 759.).
An express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In reFout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). See MPEP 2144.06 (II).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement Child’s teachings of dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material in the device of Ando for the purpose of using a material that has high-k dielectric value, which allows for increasing the capacitance within a smaller physical space, which allows for increasing device density.
Ando does not explicitly teach
“a board; and
a component coupled to the board, the component including a metal-insulator- metal (MIM) capacitor”
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches a board; and
a component coupled to the board, the component including a metal-insulator- metal (MIM) capacitor (see e.g., electronic system 1000, a computing device comprising MIM capacitor. A foundation substrate 1090 may be part of the computing system 1000. The foundation substrate 1090 is a motherboard that supports an apparatus that includes an on-chip capacitor i.e., the MIM capacitor, Para [0111], Figure 10).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively field to implement Childs’ teachings of a computing device comprising a MIM capacitor coupled to a board in the device of Ando so that it can serve to form an electronic device such as PC, DVD player or a mobile device.
Ando does not explicitly teach
“the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate; and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate”.
A change in size or proportion is held to be an obvious matter of design choice. See In Gardnerv.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. See MPEP 2144.04.
In a similar field of endeavor Chang teaches
the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate (see e.g., the third capacitor plate has a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second capacitor plate, Para [0048], Figures 3D and 3H); and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate (see e.g., conductive structure 343b over and in contact with the third capacitor plate, Para [0052], Figure 3H).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement Chang’s teachings of the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate; and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate in the device of Ando as a mere change in size as per device requirements and to provide an electrical connection via the interconnect to the top electrode.
Regarding claim 12, Ando, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 11 as mentioned above. Ando does not explicitly teach
“further comprising: a memory coupled to the board”.
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches a memory coupled to the board (see e.g., the processor 1010 includes on-die memory 1016. The dual integrated circuit 1011 includes on-die memory 1017. The electronic system includes an external memory 1040, Paras [0105] - [0109], Figure 10).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively field to implement Childs’ teachings of a memory coupled to a board in the device of Ando so that it can serve to form an electronic device such as PC, DVD player or a mobile device.
Regarding claim 13, Ando, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 11 as mentioned above. Ando does not explicitly teach
“further comprising: a communication chip coupled to the board”.
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches a communication chip coupled to the board (see e.g., the integrated circuit 1010 includes a communication circuit 1014. The dual integrated circuit 1011 includes a dual communications circuit 1015, Paras [0105] - [0106], Figure 10).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively field to implement Childs’ teachings of a communication chip coupled to a board in the device of Ando so that it can serve to form an electronic device such as PC, DVD player or a mobile device.
Regarding claim 14, Ando, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 11 as mentioned above. Ando does not explicitly teach
“further comprising: a camera coupled to the board”.
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches a camera coupled to the board (see e.g., input device 1070 includes a camera, Para [0110], Figure 10).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively field to implement Childs’ teachings of a camera coupled to a board in the device of Ando so that it can serve to form an electronic device such as PC, DVD player or a mobile device.
Regarding claim 15, Ando, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 11 as mentioned above. Ando does not explicitly teach
“wherein the component is a packaged integrated circuit die”.
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches wherein the component is a packaged integrated circuit die (see e.g., the computer system 1000 includes an on-chip capacitor, Para [0103], Figures 9 and 10).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively field to implement Childs’ teachings of on-chip capacitor in the device of Ando so that it can serve to form an electronic device such as PC, DVD player or a mobile device.
Regarding claim 16, Ando teaches a metal-insulator-metal (MIM) capacitor (see e.g., stacked planar capacitor structure 200, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14), comprising:
A rearrangement of parts is held to be an obvious matter of design choice. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); See also In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice).
Ando teaches a similar structure as the instant application, only difference being the electrode plates and capacitor dielectrics being arranged in a reverse order as shown in Figure 14.
Moving from top to bottom in Figure 14, the bottom electrode 116 could be considered as the first electrode plate, high-k dielectric layer 114 as the first capacitor dielectric, top electrode 110 as the second electrode plate, high-k dielectric 108 as the second capacitor dielectric and the bottom electrode 104 as the third electrode plate.
a first electrode plate, the first electrode plate having a lateral width between a first end a second end (see e.g., bottom electrode 116 has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14);
a first capacitor dielectric on the first electrode plate, the first capacitor dielectric comprising a high-k dielectric material, wherein the first capacitor dielectric has a lateral width between a first end and a second end (see e.g., high-k dielectric layer 114 has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14);, the first end of the capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the first end of the first electrode plate, and the second end of the capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the second end of the first electrode plate (see e.g., as shown in modified Figure 14 the first end of the high-k dielectric layer 114 is in vertical alignment with the first end of the bottom electrode 116, and the second end of the high-k dielectric layer 114 is in vertical alignment with the second end of the bottom electrode 116)
a second electrode plate on the first capacitor dielectric, the second electrode plate having a portion over and parallel with the first electrode plate, and the second electrode plate having a lateral width between a first end second end, (see e.g., top electrode 110, having a lateral width between a first end and a second end, having a portion on top and parallel with the bottom electrode 116, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14), wherein the second electrode has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the first capacitor dielectric ( see e.g., top electrode 110 has a bottommost surface above the uppermost surface of the high-k dielectric layer 114 as shown in the modified Figure 14, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14);
a second capacitor dielectric on the second electrode plate, the second capacitor dielectric comprising a non-perovskite high-k dielectric material (see e.g., high-k dielectric layer 108 on the top electrode 110. Materials suitable for the high-k dielectric layer include, but are not limited to, oxide-nitride-oxide, SiO.sub.2, Ta.sub.2O.sub.5, Si.sub.3N.sub.4, SiON, ZrO.sub.2, HfO.sub.2, HfSiO.sub.2, Al.sub.2O.sub.3, and any combination of two or more of the foregoing materials, Column 7, Lines 16-23, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14), wherein the second capacitor dielectric has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, (see e.g., the high-k dielectric layer 108 has a lateral width between a first end and a second end, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14), the first end of the second capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the first end of the second electrode plate, and the and the second end of the second capacitor dielectric in vertical alignment with the second end of the second electrode plate (see e.g., as shown in modified Figure 14 the first end of the high-k dielectric layer 108 is in vertical alignment with the first end of the top electrode 110, and the second end of the high-k dielectric layer 108 is in vertical alignment with the second end of the top electrode 110), wherein the second capacitor dielectric has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the second electrode plate (see e.g., high-k dielectric layer 108 has a bottommost surface above the uppermost surface of the top electrode 110 as shown in the modified Figure 14);
a third electrode plate on the second capacitor dielectric, the third electrode plate having a lateral width (see e.g., bottom electrode 104, with a lateral width, on the high-k dielectric layer 108 having a portion over and parallel with the top electrode 110, Column 8, Lines 52-67, Figure 14), wherein the third electrode plate has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the second capacitor dielectric (see e.g., as shown in modified Figure 14 the bottom electrode 104 has a bottommost surface above an uppermost surface of the high-k dielectric layer 108)
Ando does not explicitly teach
“dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material”;
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches
comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material (see e.g., a capacitor dielectric maybe barium strontium titanate, Paras [0020], [0021]; Examiner’s interpretation: BST is an example of perovskite dielectric material, Para [0021]);
Applicant has not shown any unexpected results with perovskite or a non-perovskite dielectric material. In order to rely on equivalence as a rationale supporting an obviousness rejection, the equivalency must be recognized in the prior art, and cannot be based on applicant’s disclosure or the mere fact that the components at issue are functional or mechanical equivalents. In reRuff, 256 F.2d 590, 118 USPQ 340 (CCPA 1958) (The mere fact that components are claimed as members of a Markush group cannot be relied upon to establish the equivalency of these components. However, an applicant’s expressed recognition of an art-recognized or obvious equivalent may be used to refute an argument that such equivalency does not exist.); Smithv.Hayashi, 209 USPQ 754 (Bd. of Pat. Inter. 1980) (The mere fact that phthalocyanine and selenium function as equivalent photoconductors in the claimed environment was not sufficient to establish that one would have been obvious over the other. However, there was evidence that both phthalocyanine and selenium were known photoconductors in the art of electrophotography. “This, in our view, presents strong evidence of obviousness in substituting one for the other in an electrophotographic environment as a photoconductor.” 209 USPQ at 759.).
An express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In reFout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). See MPEP 2144.06 (II).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement Child’s teachings of dielectric comprising a perovskite high-k dielectric material in the device of Ando for the purpose of using a material that has high-k dielectric value, which allows for increasing the capacitance within a smaller physical space, which allows for increasing device density.
Ando does not explicitly teach
“a board; and
a component coupled to the board, the component including a metal-insulator- metal (MIM) capacitor”
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches a board; and
a component coupled to the board, the component including a metal-insulator- metal (MIM) capacitor (see e.g., electronic system 1000, a computing device comprising MIM capacitor. A foundation substrate 1090 may be part of the computing system 1000. The foundation substrate 1090 is a motherboard that supports an apparatus that includes an on-chip capacitor i.e., the MIM capacitor, Para [0111], Figure 10).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively field to implement Childs’ teachings of a computing device comprising a MIM capacitor coupled to a board in the device of Ando so that it can serve to form an electronic device such as PC, DVD player or a mobile device.
Ando does not explicitly teach
“the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate; and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate”.
A change in size or proportion is held to be an obvious matter of design choice. See In Gardnerv.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. See MPEP 2144.04.
In a similar field of endeavor Chang teaches
the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate (see e.g., the third capacitor plate has a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second capacitor plate, Para [0048], Figures 3D and 3H); and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate (see e.g., conductive structure 343b over and in contact with the third capacitor plate, Para [0052], Figure 3H).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement Chang’s teachings of the third electrode plate having a lateral width entirely within the lateral width of the second electrode plate; and an interconnect over and in contact with the third electrode plate in the device of Ando as a mere change in size as per device requirements and to provide an electrical connection via the interconnect to the top electrode.
Regarding claim 17, Ando, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 16 as mentioned above. Ando does not explicitly teach
“further comprising: a memory coupled to the board”.
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches a memory coupled to the board (see e.g., the processor 1010 includes on-die memory 1016. The dual integrated circuit 1011 includes on-die memory 1017. The electronic system includes an external memory 1040, Paras [0105]-[0109], Figure 10).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively field to implement Child’s teachings of a memory coupled to a board in the device of Ando so that it can serve to form an electronic device such as PC, DVD player or a mobile device.
Regarding claim 18, Ando, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 16 as mentioned above. Ando does not explicitly teach
“further comprising: a communication chip coupled to the board”.
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches a communication chip coupled to the board (see e.g., the integrated circuit 1010 includes a communication circuit 1014. The dual integrated circuit 1011 includes a dual communications circuit 1015, Paras [0105] - [0106], Figure 10).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively field to implement Childs’ teachings of a communication chip coupled to a board in the device of Ando so that it can serve to form an electronic device such as PC, DVD player or a mobile device.
Regarding claim 19, Ando, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 16 as mentioned above. Ando does not explicitly teach
“further comprising: a camera coupled to the board”.
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches a camera coupled to the board (see e.g., input device 1070 includes a camera, Para [0110], Figure 10).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively field to implement Childs’ teachings of a camera coupled to a board in the device of Ando so that it can serve to form an electronic device such as PC, DVD player or a mobile device.
Regarding claim 20, Ando, as modified by Childs and Chang, teaches the limitations of claim 16 as mentioned above. Ando does not explicitly teach
“wherein the component is a packaged integrated circuit die”.
In a similar field of endeavor Childs teaches wherein the component is a packaged integrated circuit die (see e.g., the computer system 1000 includes an on-chip capacitor, Para [0103], Figures 9 and 10).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively field to implement Childs’ teachings of an on-chip capacitor in the device of Ando so that it can serve to form an electronic device such as PC, DVD player or a mobile device.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FAKEHA SEHAR whose telephone number is (571)272-4033. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:00 am - 5:00 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using
a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Yara J. Green can be reached on (571) 270-3035. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be
obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to
registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit:
https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more
information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about
filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at
866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service
Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/FAKEHA SEHAR/Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/YARA B GREEN/Supervisor Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights