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 the first embodiment in the reply filed on 06/16/25 is acknowledged.
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.
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) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakamoto et al., US 2015/0270271 in view of Lee et al., US 2004/0023456.
Sakamoto et al. shows the invention substantially as claimed including a semiconductor memory device comprising:
A substrate SB;
A landing pad (for example, PLGC) on the substrate;
A lower electrode EL on and connected to the landing pad;
A dielectric layer INS3 on and extending along a profile of the lower electrode;
An upper electrode EU1 on the dielectric layer, and an upper plate electrode (EU2,EU3) on the upper electrode (see fig.2 and paragraphs 0035-0053).
Sakamoto et al. does not expressly disclose the upper plate electrode including a first sub-plate electrode and a second sub-plate electrode doped with boron, a first concentration of the boron in the first sub-plate electrode being greater than a second concentration of the boron in the second sub-plate electrode. Lee discloses forming an upper electrode for a capacitor by increasing the implantation concentration of the dopant as the layer is deposited (see, for example, paragraphs 0024-0025). In view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the primary reference of Sakamoto et al. so as to form the upper plate electrode using the method as taught by Lee because in such a way an electrode suitable for use in a capacitor structure can be realized. Concerning the dopant being boron, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use dopant as the boron material because it is a commonly used dopant material due to a variety of reasons including its low atomic mass which allows it to be implanted with shallow junctions.
With respect to dependent claims 2-4 and 7 regarding the particular concentration distribution of the upper plate electrode, note that a prima facie case of obviousness exists because generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Concerning dependent claim 5, note that in the device of Sakamoto et al. modified by Lee et al. the second sub-plate electrode is between the first sub-plate electrode and the upper electrode since the concentration of the electrode increases as the distance away from the substrate increases.
Regarding dependent claim 6, note that in the device of Sakamoto et al. modified by Lee et al. discloses wherein the upper plate electrode further includes a third sub-plate electrode doped with boron, a third concentration of the boron in the third sub-plate electrode being greater than the first concentration of the boron, and the first sub-plate electrode being between the third sub-plate electrode and the second sub-plate electrode.
With respect to dependent claim 8, note that the device of Sakamoto et al. modified by Lee et al. further comprises a capping metal electrode (M2) on the upper plate electrode, the upper plate electrode being between the capping metal electrode and the upper electrode (see fig. 2 of Sakamoto).
Regarding dependent claim 9, note that the device of Sakamoto et al. modified by Lee et al. further includes a contact plug PLG3 electrically connected to the upper plate electrode, the contact plug being on the capping metal electrode (see fig. 2 of Sakamoto).
With respect to dependent claim 10, the device of Sakamoto et al. modified by Lee et al. further comprises a contact plug penetrating through the capping metal electrode and connected to the upper plate electrode (see fig. 2 of Sakamoto).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakamoto et al., US 2015/0270271 in view of Lee et al., US 2004/0023456 as applied to claims 1-10 above, and further in view of Sako, U.S. Patent 8,546,232.
Sakamoto et al. and Lee et al. are applied as above but do not expressly disclose wherein the first and second sub-plate electrode includes a silicon-germanium layer. Sako discloses a plate electrode comprising silicon-germanium (see abstract). In view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the device of Sakamoto et al. modified by Lee et al. so as to form an electrode of silicon-germanium because this is shown to be an effective electrode material.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakamoto et al., US 2015/0270271 in view of Lee et al., US 2004/0023456 as applied to claims 1-10 above, and further in view of Hara, US 2020/0411584.
Sakamoto et al. and Lee et al. are applied as above but do not expressly disclose boron having a mass number of 10 and 11. However, Hara discloses performing implantation with a boron dopant having a mass number of 10 or boron with a mass number of 11 (see paragraphs 0042-0043). In view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the device of Sakamoto et al. modified by Lee et al. to have boron dopants of mass number 10 and 11 because both of these boron isotopes are shown to be common doping materials.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 14-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art, particularly US 2021/0125993, either singly or in combination, fails to anticipate or render obvious, the limitations of: the silicon plate electrode including an undoped silicon layer, and the silicon-germanium plate electrode including a silicon-germanium layer doped with boron having a mass number of 11, as required by independent claim 14. Additionally, the prior art, particularly US 2021/0125993 fails to anticipate or render obvious, the limitations of: an upper electrode on the dielectric layer, and an upper plate electrode on the upper electrode and including a silicon plate electrode and a silicon-germanium plate electrode, the silicon-germanium plate electrode including a first sub-silicon-germanium plate electrode and a second sub- silicon-germanium plate electrode doped with boron, and a first concentration of the boron in the first sub-silicon-germanium plate electrode is greater than a second concentration of the boron in the second sub-silicon-germanium plate electrode, as required by independent claim 19.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD A BOOTH whose telephone number is (571)272-1668. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8:30 to 5:00.
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, Christine Kim can be reached at 571-272-8458. 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.
/RICHARD A BOOTH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812
January 24, 2026