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 .
Status of the Claims
Response filed August 01, 2025 is acknowledged. Claims 1-8 and 10-12 are pending.
Action on merits of claims 1-8 and 10-12 follows.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: there is no Description of FIG. 6 in the Specification.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 8 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by LEE et al. (US. Pub. No. 2014/0077225) of record.
With respect to claim 1, LEE taches a semiconductor structure as claimed including:
a substrate (200/300);
a first doped region (300) formed in the substrate;
a second doped region (310/210) formed in the substrate, and surrounding the first doped region (300), wherein the first doped region (300) has a doping type which is the same as that of the substrate (200/300) and opposite that of a second doped region (310/210); and
a plurality of strip third doped regions (210, three middle) formed in the substrate and located underneath the first doped region (300) and the second doped region, wherein the third doped region (210) has a doping type which is the same as that of the second doped region (310/210),
wherein each of the plurality of strip third doped regions (210) is spaced apart from one another, each exhibiting a separate doping profile. (See FIG. 7).
With respect to claim 2, the substrate of LEE is a P-type substrate or an N-type substrate.
With respect to claim 4, the substrate of LEE is an N-type substrate, the doping type of the first doped region (300) is N type, the doping type of the second doped region (310/210) is P type, and the doping type of the strip third doped region (210) is P type.
With respect to claim 5, the first doped region (300) of LEE has a depth in the substrate which is the same as that of the second doped region (310).
With respect to claim 8, the strip third doped regions (210) of LEE have the same width.
With respect to claim 11, the first doped region (300) and the second doped region (310) of LEE constitute a plurality of high-voltage diodes.
With respect to claim 12, the second doped region (310/210) has a depth in the substrate (200/300) which is greater than that of the first doped region (300).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE ‘225 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of COGAN et al. (US. Patent No. 7,932,133) of record.
With respect to claim 6, LEE teaches the semiconductor structure as described in claim 1 above including: the first doped region (300) and the second doped region (310) having doping concentrations.
Thus, LEE is shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of explicitly disclosing the first doped region has a doping concentration which is the same as that of the second doped region.
However, COGAN teaches a semiconductor structure including:
a first doped region (127) formed in a substrate;
a second doped region (122) formed in the substrate and surrounding the first doped region (127), wherein the first doped region (127) has a doping type (p) which is opposite that (n) of the second doped region (122), wherein
the first doped region has a doping concentration (P+) which is the same as that (N+) of the second doped region. (See FIG. 10B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to form the first and second doped regions of ARAI having the same doping concentration as taught by COGAN to provide a protection diode more capable of withstanding high energy electric impulses.
With respect to claim 7, in view of COGAN, the third doped region (n-) has a doping concentration which is lower than that (P+) of the first doped region (127) and the second doped region (N+).
Claims 3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE ‘225 as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of KITAGAWA et al. (US. Patent No. 5,162,876) of record.
With respect to claim 3, LEE teaches the semiconductor structure as described in claim 2 above including: the substrate (200/300) is N-type substrate.
Thus, LEE is shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of explicitly disclosing the semiconductor structure when the substrate is P-type.
Note that, it is well known in the art that an N-type device can be formed with the elements having opposite that of the P-type device.
However, KITAGAWA teaches a semiconductor structure including: when the substrate (2a) is a P-type substrate, the doping type of the first doped region (2b) is P type, the doping type of the second doped region (6, edge) is N type, and the doping type of the strip third doped region (6) is N type.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to form the substrate of LEE being P-type as taught by KITAGAWA to provide a semiconductor structure of opposite conductivity.
This is well known and within ability of one having ordinary skill in the art.
With respect to claim 10, in view of KITAGAWA, when the substrate is P-type, the first doped region (300) of LEE is a high-voltage P-well region, and the second doped region (310) is a high-voltage N-well region.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed August 01, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues:
Independent claim 1 recites a combination of elements including "a substrate; a first doped region formed in the substrate; a second doped region formed in the substrate...; and a plurality of strip third doped regions formed in the substrate"
Applicant respectfully submits that the combination of elements set forth in claim 1 is not disclosed or suggested by the references relied on by the Examiner.
However, as shown in FIG. 1, LEE clearly teaches:
a substrate (200/300);
a first doped region (300) formed in the substrate;
a second doped region (310) formed in the substrate and surrounding the first doped region (300), wherein the first doped region (300) has a doping type (n) which is the same as that of the substrate (200/300) and opposite that of the second doped region (310); and
a plurality of strip (210) third doped regions formed in the substrate and located underneath the first doped region (300).
Regarding the “substrate”, there is no limit to what a substrate be other than the substrate and the first doped region being of the same doping type. In this case, the first doped region 300 is n-type and the substrate 200/300 also of n-type.
It is well known in the art that a substrate can be a layer or multiple layers.
Applicant then concludes: Therefore, it is not appropriate to compare the n- type epitaxial layer 200 and the n type epitaxial layer 300 of LEE as one substrate.
However, Applicant’s argument cannot be used as an evidence. Applicant fails to provide any evidence that the first doped region 300 of LEE does not have the same doping type as that of substrate (200/300).
Applicant further adds: “Thus, the alleged second doped regions 210 and 310 of LEE are formed in distinct doping concentrations”
However, claims 1 does not require any doping concentration of any regions. Claim 1 only requires doping types.
Regarding the secondary references, note that none of the secondary references are used in combination of LEE to reject claim 1.
Applicant does not separately argue about the patentability of the dependent claims.
The rejection of all claims are maintained.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ANH D MAI whose telephone number is (571)272-1710 (Email: Anh.Mai2@uspto.gov). The examiner can normally be reached 10:00-4:00PM.
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, Sue A Purvis can be reached on 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.
/ANH D MAI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893