Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/850,078

SELF-ASSEMBLED MONOLAYER ON A DIELECTRIC FOR TRANSITION METAL DICHALCOGENIDE GROWTH FOR STACKED 2D CHANNELS

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jun 27, 2022
Examiner
FOX, BRANDON C
Art Unit
2818
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Intel Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
686 granted / 800 resolved
+17.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
824
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
56.9%
+16.9% vs TC avg
§102
33.9%
-6.1% vs TC avg
§112
5.9%
-34.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 800 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . This is a Final office action based on application 17/850,078 in response to reply filed October 24, 2025. Claims 1-10, 12-19, & 22-26 are currently pending and have been considered below. 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. Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shen (Pre-Grant Publication 2023/0062389) in view of Frougier (US Patent 10,388,732). Regarding claim 1 & 6, Shen disclose a semiconductor structure comprising: a plurality of channels (Fig. 17b, 102), wherein each of the plurality of channels is a monolayer (Paragraph [0018]), and wherein the plurality of channels are in a stacked formation; one or more dielectric layers (104/106), respectively, separating each of the plurality of channels; and Shen does not explicitly disclose a particle proximate to a surface of one of the one or more dielectric layers adjacent to one of the plurality of channel includes a selected one or more of: fluorine, chlorine, or phosphorus. However Frougier discloses a transistor device comprising: A plurality of channels (Fig. 9, 44) adjacent to a plurality of dielectric layers (35) wherein the channel material can include a dopant such as phosphorus therefore a particle proximate to a surface of the dielectric layer adjacent to the channels can include phosphorus (Col. 6, Lines 32-46). Frougier further discloses the material of dielectric layer (35) can be silicon oxide (Col. 5, Lines 14-16) therefore a particle proximate to a surface of one or more dielectric layers adjacent to the one of the plurality of channel includes oxygen. It would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to form the channel material to include phosphorus because it will form a channel of an n-type electrical conductivity and increase its electrical conductivity (Col. 6, Lines 32-46). Further silicon oxide is a commonly known material for a dielectric layer to provide isolation between the channel and the gate electrode material. Regarding claim 2, Shen further discloses: each of the plurality of channels is a transition metal dichalcogenide (TMD) monolayer (Paragraph [0018]). Regarding claim 3, Shen further discloses: the plurality of channels overlap each other in a direction perpendicular to a plane of one of the plurality of channels (Fig. 17b). Regarding claim 4, Shen further discloses: one or more metal layers (304; Paragraph [0037]) adjacent, respectively, to the one or more dielectric layers. Regarding claim 5, Shen further discloses: The channel can be grown using a chemical vapor deposition process (Paragraph [0019]). Further it should be known that even though product-by process claims are limited and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself and not on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior art product was made by a different process. In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964 (Fed. Cir. 1985) Since claim ** depends from claim 1 which is a structure claim, the method limitations of claim 5 (such as grown using metal oxide chemical vapor deposition process) are not considered germane to the issue or patentability and have not been given any patentable weight. Regarding claim 7, Shen further discloses: a width of the each of the plurality of channels is between 5 and 50 nanometers (Paragraph [0018]). Regarding claim 8, Shen further discloses: a source (ES1;Paragraph [0070]) at a first end of the plurality of channels and the one or more dielectric layers; and a drain (ES2) at a second end of the plurality of channels and the one or more dielectric layers opposite the first end. Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shen (Pre-Grant Publication 2023/0062389) in view of Frougier (US Patent 10,388,732) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nguyen (Pre-Grant Publication 2022/0238721). Regarding claim 9, Shen and Frougier disclose all of the limitations of claim 1 (addressed above). Shen further discloses: A wafer (302) One of the plurality of channels (102) is on the wafer. Shen does not disclose the wafer includes a self assembled monolayer material However Nguyen discloses a semiconductor device comprising: A wafer (Fig. 5, 110) wherein a 2D transition metal dichalcogenide channel (130;Paragraph [0059]) is formed on the wafer. An adhesive layer (120; Paragraph [0064 & 0065]) is formed on the wafer, wherein the adhesive layer can be a self assembled monolayer. It would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to form the adhesive layer as a self assembled monolayer on the wafer because it will serve to improve the adhesive force between the channel and a surface of wafer (Paragraph 0064-0065]). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 10, 12-19, 22-26 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Claim 10 is allowed because none of the prior art either alone or in combination discloses a transistor device comprising: a first dielectric layer on a metal layer; a second dielectric layer above the first dielectric layer; and wherein a side of the first dielectric layer has a first area and a second area, wherein the first area and the second area are separate and distinct, and wherein the second area includes oxygen atoms, and wherein a density of oxygen atoms on the second area of the side of the first dielectric layer is greater than a density of oxygen atoms on the first area of the side of the first dielectric layer. Claim 12-17 are also allowed based on its dependency from claim 10. Claim 18 is allowed because none of the prior art either alone or in combination discloses an apparatus comprising: a first dielectric layer on a metal layer; a gap layer on the first dielectric layer; a second dielectric layer above the gap layer; a seed material on the first dielectric layer, the seed material extending into the gap layer; and a growth promoter on the first dielectric layer surrounding the seed material. Claims 19 & 21 are also allowed based on their dependency from claim 18. Claim 22 is allowed because none of the prior art either alone or in combination discloses depositing a self-assembled monolayer (SAM) material on the transistor structure, wherein the SAM material is partially deposited on each of the first dielectric layers and extends into each of the gap layers, in combination with the other limitations of claim 22. Claims 23-25 are also allowed based on their dependency from claim 22. Claim 26 is allowed because none of the prior art either alone or in combination discloses a die comprising: a first dielectric layer on a metal layer; a second dielectric layer above the first dielectric layer; and wherein a side of the first dielectric layer has a first area and a second area, wherein the first area and the second area are separate and distinct, and wherein the second area includes oxygen atoms, wherein a side of the second dielectric layer has a first area and a second area, wherein the first area and the second area are separate and distinct, and wherein the second area includes oxygen atoms, and wherein a density of oxygen atoms on the second area of the side of the second dielectric layer is greater than a density of oxygen atoms on the first area of the side of the second dielectric layer. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” 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 BRANDON C FOX whose telephone number is (571)270-5016. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-6:00PM. 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, Jeff W Natalini can be reached at 571-272-2266. 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. /BRANDON C FOX/Examiner, Art Unit 2818 /DAVID VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 27, 2022
Application Filed
Mar 29, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 24, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 19, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598785
Semiconductor Devices and Methods of Manufacturing
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593476
FIN FIELD-EFFECT TRANSISTOR DEVICE WITH HYBRID CONDUCTION MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588213
SEMICONDUCTOR MEMORY STRUCTURE HAVING ENHANCED MEMORY WINDOW AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588291
SUBSTRATES INCLUDING MICRO-STRUCTURED THIN FILM CAPACITORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581635
INTEGRATED CIRCUIT DEVICE AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+10.0%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 800 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month