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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2,6-8,12,21-22,26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al, hereinafter Lee (US 2016/0087104 A1).
Regarding claim 1: Lee teaches (fig.1B-9B) A semiconductor device, comprising: a plurality of nanostructures (active fins AF);
a gate dielectric layer (135) disposed on each nanostructure (AF) of the plurality of nanostructures (AF);
a gate electrode (140) disposed on the gate dielectric layer (135) and on the plurality of nanostructures (AF);
and a source/drain region (SD) adjacent to the plurality of nanostructures (AF), wherein the source/drain region (SD) comprises an epitaxial structure (118) including a polygonal- shaped upper portion (polygonal shape shown in fig. 9B with width W2 hereinafter PG) and a column-like lower portion (section with width W1, hereinafter CP);
wherein the polygonal-shaped upper portion (PG) has multiple facets (sides of SD as shown in fig.9B, hereinafter FACE1 and FACE2 as shown in fig. below) each of the facets (FACE1 and FACE2) characterized by a (111) crystallographic orientation (sides S1 and S2 mentioned in par.64 and 89 have a crystal orientation (111));
wherein the polygonal-shaped upper portion (PG) includes corner regions (CR as shown in fig. below are within EP2), each of the corner regions (CR) adjacent an intersection of two facets (FACE1/FACE2 as shown in fig. below) with a (111) crystallographic orientation (par.89 mentions S1 and S2 being crystal orientation (111)) and an epitaxial body region (EP3) in contact with the corner regions (CR);
wherein the corner regions (CR) comprise boron and are characterized (par 65-69 mentions the shape of the SD structure is created by varying concentrations of epitaxial layers EP1-EP3 to create a corner region area CR where two different widths meet and form convex/concave shapes in EP2 CR) by a first dopant concentration (CR is in EP2 and the concentration of Boron for Ep2 is 1×10.supar.21 to 5×10.supar.21 atom/cm.supar.3 ,par.68, hereinafter C1) and the epitaxial body region (EP3) is characterized by a second dopant concentration (equal to or higher than 1×10.supar.20 atom/cm.supar.3 and be lower than that of the second epitaxial layer EP2,par 68, hereinafter C2), and the first dopant concentration (C1) is higher (as mentioned in par.68) than the second dopant concentration (C2).
PNG
media_image1.png
512
744
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Lee is silent to explicitly teach wherein the corner regions (CR) comprise boron clusters (doping boron in high concentrations is commonly known in the art to form clusters) and are characterized (par 65-69 mentions the shape of the SD structure is created by varying concentrations of epitaxial layers EP1-EP3 to create a corner region area CR where two different widths meet and form convex/concave shapes in EP2 CR) by a first dopant concentration (CR is in EP2 and the concentration of Boron for Ep2 is 1×10.supar.21 to 5×10.supar.21 atom/cm.supar.3 ,par.68, hereinafter C1) and the epitaxial body region (EP3) is characterized by a second dopant concentration (equal to or higher than 1×10.supar.20 atom/cm.supar.3 and be lower than that of the second epitaxial layer EP2,par 68, hereinafter C2), and the first dopant concentration (C1) is higher (as mentioned in par.68) than the second dopant concentration (C2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to recognize that the corner regions of Lee would comprise boron clusters since doping boron in high concentrations such as 1×10.sup.18 atom/cm.sup.3 to 5×10.sup.21 atom/cm.sup.3 is commonly known in the art to form clusters of boron whether intentional or not.
Regarding claim 2: Lee teaches the semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein the epitaxial structure (118) is doped with boron (par. 68).
Regarding claim 6: Lee teaches the semiconductor device of claim 2, further comprising carbon containing (SiCN , par.72) sidewall spacers (114) disposed adjacent to the epitaxial structure (118).
Regarding claim 7: Lee teaches (fig.1B -9B) a semiconductor device, comprising: a plurality of nanostructures (active fins AF) on a substrate (100);
and an epitaxial structure (118) adjacent to one of the plurality of nanostructures (AF) wherein the epitaxial structure (118) comprises a polygonal-shaped upper portion (polygonal shape shown in fig. 9B with width W2 hereinafter PG) and a column-like lower portion (section with width W1, hereinafter CP);
wherein the polygonal-shaped upper portion (PG) has multiple facets (sides of SD as shown in fig.9B, hereinafter FACE1 and FACE2 as shown in fig. above), each of the facets (FACE1 and FACE2) characterized by a (111) crystallographic orientation (sides S1 and S2 mentioned in par.64 and 89 have a crystal orientation (111)); wherein the polygonal-shaped upper portion (PG) comprises: corner regions (CR as shown in fig. above are within EP2), each corner region (CR) adjacent (as shown in fig.above) an intersection of two of the multiple facets (FACE and FACE2) having a (111) crystallographic orientation (par.89 mentions S1 and S2 being crystal orientation (111));
and an epitaxial body region (EP3) in contact with the corner regions (CR);
wherein the corner regions (CR) comprise boron and are characterized (par 65-69 mentions the shape of the SD structure is created by varying concentrations of epitaxial layers EP1-EP3 to create a corner region area CR where two different widths meet and form convex/concave shapes in EP2 CR) by a first dopant concentration (CR is in EP2 and the concentration of Boron for Ep2 is 1×10.supar.21 to 5×10.supar.21 atom/cm.supar.3 ,par.68, hereinafter C1) and the epitaxial body region (EP3) is characterized by a second dopant concentration (equal to or higher than 1×10.supar.20 atom/cm.supar.3 and be lower than that of the second epitaxial layer EP2,par 68, hereinafter C2), and the first dopant concentration (C1) is higher (as mentioned in par.68) than the second dopant concentration (C2).
Lee is silent to explicitly teach wherein the corner regions (CR) comprise boron clusters (doping boron in high concentrations is commonly known in the art to form clusters) and are characterized (par 65-69 mentions the shape of the SD structure is created by varying concentrations of epitaxial layers EP1-EP3 to create a corner region area CR where two different widths meet and form convex/concave shapes in EP2 CR) by a first dopant concentration (CR is in EP2 and the concentration of Boron for Ep2 is 1×10.supar.21 to 5×10.supar.21 atom/cm.supar.3 ,par.68, hereinafter C1) and the epitaxial body region (EP3) is characterized by a second dopant concentration (equal to or higher than 1×10.supar.20 atom/cm.supar.3 and be lower than that of the second epitaxial layer EP2,par 68, hereinafter C2), and the first dopant concentration (C1) is higher (as mentioned in par.68) than the second dopant concentration (C2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to recognize that the corner regions of Lee would comprise boron clusters since doping boron in high concentrations such as 1×10.sup.18 atom/cm.sup.3 to 5×10.sup.21 atom/cm.sup.3 is commonly known in the art to form clusters of boron whether intentional or not.
Regarding claim 8: Lee teaches the semiconductor device of claim 7, wherein the epitaxial structure (118) is doped with boron (par. 68).
Regarding claim 12: Lee teaches the semiconductor device of claim 8, further comprising carbon containing (SiCN, par.72) sidewall spacers (114) disposed adjacent to the epitaxial structure (118).
Regarding claim 21: Lee teaches a semiconductor device, comprising: a semiconductor substrate (100); a plurality of nanostructures (active fins AF) over the semiconductor substrate (100);
a gate dielectric layer (135) disposed on each of the plurality of nanostructures (AF);
a gate electrode (140) disposed on the gate dielectric layer (135) and on the plurality of nanostructures (AF);
and a source/drain region (SD) adjacent to the plurality of nanostructures (AF) and comprising an epitaxial structure (118), wherein the epitaxial structure (118) comprising including a polygonal-shaped upper portion (polygonal shape shown in fig. 9B with width W2 hereinafter PG) and a column-like lower portion (section with width W1, hereinafter CP), and the polygonal-shaped upper portion (PG) has multiple facets (sides of SD as shown in fig.9B, hereinafter FACE1 and FACE2 as shown in fig. above), each of the facets (FACE1 and FACE2) characterized by a (111) crystallographic orientation (par.89 mentions S1 and S2 being crystal orientation (111));
wherein the polygonal-shaped upper portion (PG) comprises corner regions (CR as shown in fig. above and is within EP2), each of the corner regions (CR) adjacent an intersection of two facets (FACE1 and FACE2) with a (111) crystallographic orientation (par.89 mentions S1 and S2 being crystal orientation (111)) and an epitaxial body region (EP3) in contact with the corner regions (CR);
and wherein the corner regions (CR) comprise boron and are characterized (par 65-69 mentions the shape of the SD structure is created by varying concentrations of epitaxial layers EP1-EP3 to create a corner region area CR where two different widths meet and form convex/concave shapes in EP2 CR) by a first dopant concentration (CR is in EP2 and the concentration of Boron for Ep2 is 1×10.supar.21 to 5×10.supar.21 atom/cm.supar.3 ,par.68, hereinafter C1) and the epitaxial body region (EP3) is characterized by a second dopant concentration (equal to or higher than 1×10.supar.20 atom/cm.supar.3 and be lower than that of the second epitaxial layer EP2,par 68, hereinafter C2), and the first dopant concentration (C1) is higher (as mentioned in par.68) than the second dopant concentration (C2).
Lee is silent to explicitly teach wherein the corner regions (CR) comprise boron clusters (doping boron in high concentrations is commonly known in the art to form clusters) and are characterized (par 65-69 mentions the shape of the SD structure is created by varying concentrations of epitaxial layers EP1-EP3 to create a corner region area CR where two different widths meet and form convex/concave shapes in EP2 CR) by a first dopant concentration (CR is in EP2 and the concentration of Boron for Ep2 is 1×10.supar.21 to 5×10.supar.21 atom/cm.supar.3 ,par.68, hereinafter C1) and the epitaxial body region (EP3) is characterized by a second dopant concentration (equal to or higher than 1×10.supar.20 atom/cm.supar.3 and be lower than that of the second epitaxial layer EP2,par 68, hereinafter C2), and the first dopant concentration (C1) is higher (as mentioned in par.68) than the second dopant concentration (C2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to recognize that the corner regions of Lee would comprise boron clusters since doping boron in high concentrations such as 1×10.sup.18 atom/cm.sup.3 to 5×10.sup.21 atom/cm.sup.3 is commonly known in the art to form clusters of boron whether intentional or not.
Regarding claim 22: Lee teaches the semiconductor device of claim 21, wherein the epitaxial structure (118) is doped with boron (par. 68).
Regarding claim 26: Lee teaches the semiconductor device of claim 22, further comprising carbon containing (SiCN , par.72) sidewall spacers (114) disposed adjacent to the epitaxial structure (118).
Regarding claim 27: Lee teaches the semiconductor device of claim 26, wherein the polygonal-shaped upper portion (PG) is above the carbon-containing sidewall spacers (114).
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al, hereinafter Lee (US 2016/0087104 A1) as applied to claim 1
Regarding claim 3: Lee teaches the semiconductor device of claim 2, wherein the corner regions (CR) are characterized by a boron concentration in a range (concentration can range from 1×10.sup.18 atom/cm.sup.3 to 5×10.sup.21 atom/cm.sup.3 which includes 1.0 X 1021/cm3 to about 3.0 X 1021/cm3, par.40) of between about 1.0 X 1021/cm3 to about 3.0 X 1021/cm3
Lee is silent to explicitly teach wherein the corner regions are characterized by a cross-sectional area in a range of between about 1.0nm2 to about 25.0nm2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the corner region area of Lee can have a range of 1 to 25 nm^2 since it is commonly known FET devices include source and drain regions that are 10-50 nm so the doped area in the corner would likely be in the range of 1 to 25 nm depending on the design and size requirements.
Regarding claim 4: Lee teaches the semiconductor device of claim 2,
and a boron concentration (concentration can range from 1×10.sup.18 atom/cm.sup.3 to 5×10.sup.21 atom/cm.sup.3 which includes 1.0 X 1021/cm3 to about 3.0 X 1021/cm3, par.40 of Lee) in a range of between about 1.0 X 1021/cm3.
Lee is silent to explicitly teach wherein the corner regions are characterized by a cross-sectional area above about 1.0nm2 to about 2.0nm2
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the corner region area of Lee can have a range of 1 to 25 nm^2 since it is commonly known FET devices include source and drain regions that are 10-50 nm so the doped area in the corner would likely be in the range of 1 to 25 nm depending on the design and size requirements.
Regarding claim 5: Lee teaches the semiconductor device of claim 2,
Lee is silent to explicitly teach wherein the corner regions are characterized by a size in a range of between 5 nm2 and 100 nm2 between 5 nm2 and 100 nm2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the corner region area of Lee can have a range of 1 to 25 nm^2 since it is commonly known FET devices include source and drain regions that are 10-50 nm so the doped area in the corner would likely be in the range of 1 to 25 nm depending on the design and size requirements.
Claims 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al, hereinafter Lee (US 2016/0087104 A1) as applied to claim 7
Regarding claim 9: Lee teaches the semiconductor device of claim 8, wherein the corner regions (CR) are characterized by a boron concentration in a range (concentration can range from 1×10.sup.18 atom/cm.sup.3 to 5×10.sup.21 atom/cm.sup.3 which includes 1.0 X 1021/cm3 to about 3.0 X 1021/cm3, par.40) of between about 1.0 X 1021/cm3 to about 3.0 X 1021/cm3
Lee is silent to explicitly teach wherein the corner regions are characterized by a cross-sectional area in a range of between about 1.0nm2 to about 25.0nm2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the corner region area of Lee can have a range of 1 to 25 nm^2 since it is commonly known FET devices include source and drain regions that are 10-50 nm so the doped area in the corner region would likely be in the range of 1 to 25 nm depending on the design and size requirements.
Regarding claim 10: Lee teaches the semiconductor device of claim 8,
and a boron concentration (concentration can range from 1×10.sup.18 atom/cm.sup.3 to 5×10.sup.21 atom/cm.sup.3 which includes 1.0 X 1021/cm3 to about 3.0 X 1021/cm3, par.40 of Lee) above about 1.0 X 1021/cm3.
Lee is silent to explicitly teach wherein the corner regions are characterized by a cross-sectional area in a range of between about 1.0nm2 to about 2.0nm2
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the corner region area of Lee can have a range of 1 to 25 nm^2 since it is commonly known FET devices include source and drain regions that are 10-50 nm so the doped area in the corner would likely be in the range of 1 to 25 nm depending on the design and size requirements.
Regarding claim 11: Lee teaches the semiconductor device of claim 8,
Lee is silent to explicitly teach wherein the corner regions are characterized by a size in a range of between 5 nm2 and 100 nm2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the corner region area of Lee can have a range of 1 to 25 nm^2 since it is commonly known FET devices include source and drain regions that are 10-50 nm so the doped area in the corner would likely be in the range of 1 to 25 nm depending on the design and size requirements.
Claims 23-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al, hereinafter Lee (US 2016/0087104 A1) as applied to claim 21
Regarding claim 23: Lee teaches the semiconductor device of claim 22, wherein the corner regions (CR) are characterized by a boron concentration in a range (concentration can range from 1×10.sup.18 atom/cm.sup.3 to 5×10.sup.21 atom/cm.sup.3 which includes 1.0 X 1021/cm3 to about 3.0 X 1021/cm3, par.40) of between about 1.0 X 1021/cm3 to about 3.0 X 1021/cm3
Lee is silent to explicitly teach wherein the corner regions are characterized by a cross-sectional area in a range of between about 1.0nm2 to about 25.0nm2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the corner region area of Lee can have a range of 1 to 25 nm^2 since it is commonly known FET devices include source and drain regions that are 10-50 nm so the doped area in the corner region would likely be in the range of 1 to 25 nm depending on the design and size requirements.
Regarding claim 24: Lee teaches the semiconductor device of claim 22,
and a boron concentration (concentration can range from 1×10.sup.18 atom/cm.sup.3 to 5×10.sup.21 atom/cm.sup.3 which includes 1.0 X 1021/cm3 to about 3.0 X 1021/cm3, par.40 of Lee) in a range of between about 1.0 X 1021/cm3.
Lee is silent to explicitly teach wherein the corner regions are characterized by a cross-sectional area above about 1.0/nm2 to about 2.0/nm2
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the corner region area of Lee can have a range of 1 to 25 nm^2 since it is commonly known FET devices include source and drain regions that are 10-50 nm so the doped area in the corner would likely be in the range of 1 to 25 nm depending on the design and size requirements.
Regarding claim 25: Lee teaches the semiconductor device of claim 22,
Lee is silent to explicitly teach wherein the corner regions are characterized by a size in a range of between 5 nm2 and 100 nm2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the corner region area of Lee can have a range of 1 to 25 nm^2 since it is commonly known FET devices include source and drain regions that are 10-50 nm so the doped area in the corner would likely be in the range of 1 to 25 nm depending on the design and size requirements.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/03/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 7-8 of the applicant’s response, applicant argues Lee fails to teach the limitations of claims 1,7, and 21 “wherein the corner regions comprise boron clusters and are characterized by a first dopant concentration and the epitaxial body region is characterized by a second dopant concentration, and the first dopant concentration is higher than the second dopant concentration.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Although does not specifically mention boron clusters in the corner regions, doping boron in high concentrations such as 1×10.sup.18 atom/cm.sup.3 to 5×10.sup.21 atom/cm.sup.3 is commonly known in the art to form clusters of boron whether intentional or not.
Therefore, the rejection of claims 1,7 and 21 remain.
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 RICKY VERDES whose telephone number is (703)756-1401. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 07:30 - 03:30 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, Jessica Manno can be reached on (571) 272-2339. 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.
/RICKY VERDES/Examiner, Art Unit 2898
/JESSICA S MANNO/SPE, Art Unit 2898