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 1-14, 16-17 and 20-21 are pending in this application.
Applicant elected without traverse Invention I, Species A in the reply filed on April 22, 2025.
Claims 16-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 April 22, 2025.
The Examiner notes that claims 1-14 and 20-21 are examined and claims 16-17 are withdrawn.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP2022-046753, filed on March 23, 2022.
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s Amendment filed August 3, 2026. Claims 1, 14, and 20 are amended. Claim 15 is cancelled. Claims 16-17 remain withdrawn. Claim 21 is newly added. The Examiner notes that claims 1-14 and 20-21 are examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 20 is 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 20 recites the limitation "the core layer" in lns. 21 and 22. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this action, “the core layer” in claim 20 will be interpreted to mean “the second insulator.”
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 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2019/0198509 A1) in view of Hinoue (US 2022/0285387 A1).
With respect to claim 20, Kim teaches in Fig. 16:
semiconductor memory device (construction 10) comprising:
a substrate (base 22);
a layer stack (stack 12) in a first direction above the substrate; and
a pillar (channel material pillar that includes insulative material 48, channel material 46, tunneling materials 40, 42, and 44) penetrating the layer stack in the first direction, wherein the layer stack includes:
a first conductor (conductive material 58); and
a first insulator (second material 20, which is insulative per para. 22) on an upper surface of the first conductor along the first direction,
the pillar includes:
a second insulator (insulative material 48) extending along an extending direction of the pillar;
a semiconductor layer (channel material 46) covering a circumference of the second insulator; and
a stacked film (tunneling layers 40, 42, and 44) covering a side surface of the semiconductor layer at a height of the layer stack, and
Kim fails to teach:
the second insulator includes a fourth part having a void, a fifth part in contact with a lower end of the fourth part and having no voids at a height of the first conductor, and a sixth part in contact with an upper end of the fourth part and having no voids at the height of the first conductor, the diameter of the second insulator in the fourth part is larger than that of the core layer in the fifth part and that of the core layer in the sixth part, and the second insulator has the same thickness in the fourth part, the fifth part and the sixth part.
Hinoue teaches in Fig. 5J:
the second insulator (dielectric core 62) includes a fourth part having a void (cavities 69), a fifth part in contact with a lower end of the fourth part and having no voids at a height of the first conductor (42), and a sixth part in contact with an upper end of the fourth part and having no voids at the height of the first conductor,
the diameter of the second insulator in the fourth part is larger than that of the core layer in the fifth part and that of the core layer in the sixth part,
and the second insulator has the same thickness in the fourth part, the fifth part and the sixth part ([0092] “The dielectric core layer 62C can be deposited by a conformal deposition method”).
PNG
media_image1.png
498
427
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kim discloses the claimed invention except for the void and thicknesses of portions of the second layer. Hinoue discloses that it is known in the art to provide a void within the insulative layer in a memory pillar due to using a conformal deposition process to fill a trench with nonuniform thickness. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a void within the insulative layer for the purpose of having flexibility in manufacturing processes that allows for a method of forming the core layer that includes a void. See MPEP 2144.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-14 and 21 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: regarding claim 1, prior art of record does not fairly disclose or make obvious the claimed device as a whole as are claimed by the Applicant. Thus, the Applicant’s claims are determined to be novel and non-obvious.
In the previous office action, claim 1 was rejected as anticipated by Lim (US 2021/0066346 A1) and as obvious over Higuchi (US 2017/0271527 A1) in view of Yoo (US 2015/0333186 A1). The newly amended limitations are known in Hinoue (US 2022/0285387 A1) as described in the rejection of claim 20 above. However, upon consideration of the claim as a whole the Examiner determines it would not be obvious to modify Lim or Higuchi/Yoo by Hinoue to meet the claim limitation. The modification is nonobvious because none of Lim, Highuchi, or Yoo have a core layer that has a thickness that thicker at the level of the conductive layers of the stack, so depositing the core layer by the conformal process of Hinoue would not lead to the claimed limitations. Modifying the core layer of Lim or Higuchi/Yoo would require a change in the thickness of other layers that may interfere with the operation of the device and cause other limitations of claim 1 to no longer be met.
Dependent claims 2-14 and 21 are found allowable at least for the same reason as independent claim 1 upon which they depend.
Upon completing an updated prior art search and considering the combination of limitations as presented as a whole for the claims, the features highlighted above are considered an improvement over the prior art and have not been found to be anticipated or rendered obvious by a combination of prior art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 9-16, filed August 3, 2026, with respect to claim 1 and its dependents have been fully considered and are persuasive. The prior art rejections of claims 1-14 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 20 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.
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 AARON MICHAEL WEGNER whose telephone number is (571)270-7647. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30 AM - 5 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, Jacob Choi can be reached at (469) 295-9060. 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.
/A.M.W./Examiner, Art Unit 2897
/JACOB Y CHOI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2897
