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
Applicant’s election without traverse of invention II, claims 10-20, in the reply filed on 11/05/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-9 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 11/05/2025.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because of the following:
In FIGS. 2-28, reference characters “A” and “B” are not mentioned in the specification.
In FIGS. 2-7, the drawing below is not mentioned in the specification. Additionally, the objects in the drawing are not labeled.
PNG
media_image1.png
249
344
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: the text “the same” is suggested to be changed to “a same” for clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: the text “the height and width” is suggested to be changed to “the height and the width” for clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 10-20 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.
The term “full” in claim 10 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “full” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The limitation “a full wrap-around contact” in the claim has been rendered indefinite by the use of the term “full”. Note that Merriam-Webster defines full as containing as much or as many as is possible.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are: among height, length, width of the source/drain; between front side of the source/drain and height, length, width of the source/drain; between back side of the source/drain and height, length, width of the source/drain.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “a source/drain having a height, a length, and a width” in line 2. It is not clear whether the limitation refers to source/drain expanding in three different directions, or the limitation refers to three different surfaces of source/drain.
Claim 13 recites the limitation " the metal-silicide layer" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation " the partial front-side wrap-around contact " in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the top" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are among top side of the first source/drain and opposite sides of the first source/drain.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the top" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are among top side of the second source/drain and opposite sides of the second source/drain.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 10-12, as so far as understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yuh (US 2023/0067715).
Regarding claim 10, Yuh discloses, in FIG. 18 and in related text, a semiconductor device, comprising:
a source/drain (190) having a height, a length, and a width (in horizontal, vertical and into the paper directions); and
a full wrap-around contact surrounding (covering) at least a partial length (in horizontal direction) of the source/drain,
wherein the full wrap-around contact includes a frontside recessed wrap-around contact (250) from a front side (lower side) of the source/drain and a backside conductive contact (360) from a back side (upper side) of the source/drain (see Yuh, [0074]-[0075], [0086]).
Regarding claim 11, Yuh discloses the device of claim 10.
Yuh discloses the frontside recessed wrap-around source/drain contact (250) and the backside conductive contact (360) are made of the same conductive material (copper) (see Yuh, [0075], [0086]).
Regarding claim 12, Yuh discloses the device of claim 11.
Yuh discloses one or more semiconductor nanosheet layers (122, 180) adjoining a face of the source/drain (190) formed by the height and width (in vertical and into the paper directions) (see Yuh, FIG. 7, [0042], [0044], [0060]-[0062], [0074]).
Claims 10-12, as so far as understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chang (US 2024/0030136).
Regarding claim 10, Chang discloses, in FIG. 27 and in related text, a semiconductor device, comprising:
a source/drain (146) having a height, a length, and a width (in X, Y, Z directions); and
a full wrap-around contact surrounding (covering) at least a partial length (in X direction) of the source/drain,
wherein the full wrap-around contact includes a frontside recessed wrap-around contact (186) from a front side (lower side) of the source/drain and a backside conductive contact (196) from a back side (upper side) of the source/drain (see Chang, [0015], [0055], [0067]).
Regarding claim 11, Chang discloses the device of claim 10.
Chang discloses the frontside recessed wrap-around source/drain contact (186) and the backside conductive contact (196) are made of the same conductive material (copper) (see Chang, [0055], [0057], [0067]).
Regarding claim 12, Chang discloses the device of claim 11.
Chang discloses one or more semiconductor nanosheet layers (106, 148) adjoining a face of the source/drain (146) formed by the height and width (in Y and Z direction) (see Chang, FIG. 27, [0013], [0032]).
Claim 17, as so far as understood, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yuh (US 2023/0067715).
Regarding claim 17, Yuh discloses, in FIG. 26A and in related text, a backside power connection device, comprising:
a backside power rail (432/430) on a backside power delivery network (BSPDN) (BMLI);
a backside ILD layer (370) on the backside power rail and the backside power delivery network (BSPDN);
a backside conductive contact (360s) in the backside ILD layer, wherein the backside conductive contact is in electrical contact with the backside power rail;
a first source/drain (190s) on the backside conductive contact; and
a frontside recessed wrap-around contact (250) on the top and opposite sides of the first source/drain (see Yuh, [0075], [0111], [0113], [0116], [0118], [0135]).
Claims 17-20, as so far as understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chang (US 2024/0030136).
Regarding claim 17, Chang discloses, in FIG. 27 and in related text, a backside power connection device, comprising:
a backside power rail (197) on a backside power delivery network (BSPDN);
a backside ILD layer (191) on the backside power rail and the backside power delivery network (BSPDN);
a backside conductive contact (196) in the backside ILD layer, wherein the backside conductive contact is in electrical contact with the backside power rail;
a first source/drain (146 in the middle of FIG. 27) on the backside conductive contact; and
a frontside recessed wrap-around contact (186) on the top and opposite sides of the first source/drain (see Chang, [0034], [0055], [0061], [0068]).
Regarding claim 18, Chang discloses the device of claim 17.
Chang discloses a second source/drain (146 at right hand side of FIG. 27) on the backside ILD layer (191) (see Chang, FIG. 27, [0034]).
Regarding claim 19, Chang discloses the device of claim 18.
Chang discloses nanosheet layer segments (106, 148) adjoining the first source/drain and the second source/drain (see Chang, FIG. 27, [0013], [0032], [0034]).
Regarding claim 20, Chang discloses the device of claim 18.
Chang discloses a second frontside recessed wrap-around contact (186) on the top and opposite sides of the second source/drain (146), and a back-end-of-line (BEOL) interconnect layer (158b) on and in electrical contact with the second frontside recessed wrap-around contact (see Chang, FIG. 23, [0058]-[0059]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHIH TSUN A CHOU whose telephone number is (408)918-7583. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-16:00 Arizona Time.
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, Lynne Gurley can be reached at (571) 272-1670. 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.
/SHIH TSUN A CHOU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2811