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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1-9, 17-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/30/25.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 10-16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 10-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
The specification does not clearly describe one conductive contact electrically contacting both source/drain and replacement metal gate. Paragraphs [0095]-[0097] describe: “In one or more embodiments, the contact trenches 340 and openings 335 can be filled with a conductive metal, …, using a conformal deposition (e.g., ALD) to form conductive contacts 350.” Further, the phrase “in electrical contact with both…” is ambiguous regarding direct contact, indirect conductive path, through vias, or through metal lines. Does a conductive path through multiple layers count or must one physical contact directly touch both?
The other claims are rejected as being dependent on an indefinite base claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 10-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the first gate contact" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “a conductive contact in electrical contact with both the source/drain and the replacement metal gate structure on a side opposite the first side of the gate contact and the first side of the first source/drain contact” in line 7-9. It is unclear what the phrase “on a side opposite” modifies. Possible interpretations include: (a) the conductive contact is on the opposite side; (b) the electrical contact occurs on the opposite side; (c) the source/drain and gate structures are on opposite sides. Also, the phrase “on a side opposite” comes after “replacement metal gate structure” without clear punctuation or structure. Accordingly, the metes and bounds of the claims cannot be determined with reasonable certainty.
Also, the phrase “both the source/drain and the replacement metal gate structure” is awkward because the “source/drain” itself already represents alternatives. It is unclear whether “both” means: (a) source and drain and gate; or (b) one source/drain region + gate.
The other claims are rejected as being incomplete as they are dependent on claim 10.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 10-15 is/are, to the extent taught and understood, rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0303551 (Chen) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0272765 (Seo).
Chen discloses (Figs. 8-15)
10. (Currently Amended) A backside power connection device, comprising:
a first source/drain contact 1218 in electrical contact with a first source/drain 802 ([0085]) on a first side of the first source/drain contact 1218;
a gate contact ([0072]) in electrical contact with a replacement metal gate structure 1216 ([0070], [0079]) on a first side of the and
a conductive contact 1208A / 1208B / 1324 / 1328 in electrical contact with both the source/drain 802 and the replacement metal gate structure 1216 on a side opposite the first side of the gate contact ([0072]) and the first side of the first source/drain contact 1218.
Chen fails to specifically disclose
a conductive contact in electrical contact with both the source/drain and the metal gate structure on a side opposite the first side of the gate contact and the first side of the first source/drain contact.
Seo teaches
A connection device comprising:
a conductive contact 112 / 114 / 116 in electrical contact with both the source/drain 58/60 and the metal gate structure 69 on a side opposite the first side of the gate contact 104 and the first side of the first source/drain contact 102 / 106.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a conductive contact arrangement sharing common conductive interconnection in Chen. The motivation would be to improve electrical routing and interconnection between source/drain and gate structures while maintaining advantages of backside power delivery as taught by Seo. Common conductive interconnections improves power distribution, reduces routing congestions, and improves electrical performance.
Chen discloses
11. (Original) The backside power connection device of claim 10, further comprising a back-end-of-line metallization layer ([0087], [0091]) on and in electrical contact with the first source/drain contact 1218 and the gate contact ([0072]).
Chen discloses (multiple source/drains, and source/drain contacts [0085])
12. (Original) The backside power connection device of claim 11, further comprising a sacrificial contact plug V0 / V1 on a second source/drain 802, and a second source/drain contact 1218 in electrical contact with the second source/drain 802 on a side opposite the sacrificial contact plug V0 / V1.
Seo teaches
13. (Original) The backside power connection device of claim 12, further comprising dummy gate sidewalls 67 adjacent to the replacement metal gate structure 69.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a dummy gate sidewall in Chen. The motivation would be to they are well-known in the art of MOSFETs as shown in Seo. See MPEP 2144.03.
Chen discloses
14. (Original) The backside power connection device of claim 13, further comprising a back-end-of-line metallization layer ([0087], [0091]) on the gate contact ([0072]), the first source/drain contact 1218, and the second source/drain contact 1218.
Chen discloses
15. (Original) The backside power connection device of claim 14, further comprising a backside power delivery network (BSPDN) on and in electrical contact with the conductive contact 1208A / 1208B / 1324 / 1328 ([0086], [0095], [0107]).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Seo as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0407900 (Yu).
The combination of references fails to teach
16. (Original) The backside power connection device of claim 15, further comprising nanosheet layer segments on opposite sides of the replacement metal gate structure.
Yu teaches (Fig. 12A)
A backside power connection device comprising:
nanosheet layer segments ([0130]) on opposite sides of the replacement metal gate structure 450.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide nanosheet wire segments in the modified device of Chen. The motivation would be to reduce electrical resistance and reduce the voltage drop and RC delay in signal transmission as taught by Yu ([0093]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent Application Publication Nos. 2022/0052157 (Chang), 2020/0203276 (Hiblot), 2023/0268389 (Jain) teach a backside power connection device.
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 TERESA M ARROYO whose telephone number is (703)756-1576. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (8:30 A.M. E.T. - 5:00 P.M. E.T.).
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, Sue Purvis can be reached at 571.272.1236. 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.
/TERESA M. ARROYO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights