Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/969,558

METHOD OF MANUFACTURING MEMORY DEVICE USING SELF-ALIGNED DOUBLE PATTERNING (SADP)

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Oct 19, 2022
Examiner
FLECK, LINDA JOAN
Art Unit
2812
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Nanya Technology Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
41 granted / 53 resolved
+9.4% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+18.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
9 currently pending
Career history
62
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
50.8%
+10.8% vs TC avg
§102
30.6%
-9.4% vs TC avg
§112
16.8%
-23.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 53 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: In paragraph [0044] Figures 2 to 43 are referred to as cross-sectional views. Figures 8, 11, 14, 17, 20, 23, 26, 29, 32, 35, 38, 41 appear to be top views where the other figure are cross-sectional views taken along A—A’ and B—B’ lines in Figures 8, 11, 14, 17, 20, 23, 26, 29, 32, 35, 38, 41. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claims 14-17 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhang et al., US 20180204731 A1, hereafter Zhang. Regarding independent claim 14, Zhang discloses: A method of manufacturing a memory device, comprising: providing a semiconductor substrate defined with an active area disposed over or in the semiconductor substrate (Zhang, Figure 6, substrate 100, and [0027]-[0028] which discloses a semiconductor substrate that may have a function layer on the surface); forming a first hard mask over the semiconductor substrate, wherein the first hard mask includes a plurality of slots (Zhang, Figure 8, discrete core layers 210 with slots between discrete pieces and [0035] discloses the use of amorphous carbon for 200); forming a second hard mask surrounding the first hard mask and disposed within the plurality of slots (Zhang, Figure 9, sidewall spacer film 400, and [0042] discloses SiNx, SiON, SiCN for 400), wherein the second hard mask includes a plurality of strips extending parallel to each other (Zhang, Figure 10, sidewall spacer layer 410 are formed from, and therefore included in sidewall spacer film 400, and the extend into the page parallel to each other, and Figure 15 and [0089] discloses the process using 410 forms a plurality of discrete fin structures 120); removing the first hard mask (Zhang, Figure 13, and [0064] core layers 210 are removed); and removing portions of the semiconductor substrate exposed through the second hard mask to form a plurality of trenches surrounding the active area (Zhang, Figure 15, discrete fin structures 120 are etched into substrate 100, and [0027]-[0028] which discloses a semiconductor substrate that may have a function layer on the surface which may be patterned by the process). Regarding Claim 15, Zhang discloses: The method according to claim 14, wherein the plurality of strips are separated from each other (Zhang, Figure 11, sidewall spacer layer 410, are shown separated from each other). Regarding Claim 16, Zhang discloses: The method according to claim 14, wherein the plurality of slots respectively correspond to the plurality of strips (Zhang, Figure 11, where the sidewall spacer layer 410 are formed between discrete core layers 210, therefore the slots correspond to the stipes). Regarding Claim 17, Zhang discloses: The method according to claim 14, wherein the first hard mask includes carbon, and the second hard mask includes oxide (Zhang, [0035] discloses the use of amorphous carbon for 200 (first hard mask) and [0042] discloses SiON (and oxide) for 400 (second hard mask layer)). Regarding Claim 19, Zhang discloses: The method according to claim 14, wherein a plurality of fins protruding from the semiconductor substrate are formed after the formation of the plurality of trenches (Zhang, Figure 15, discrete fin structures 120, and [0089] discloses the process forms a plurality of discrete fin structures). Regarding Claim 20, Zhang discloses: The method according to claim 19, wherein the plurality of fins are separated from each other (Zhang, Figure 15, show discrete fin structures 120 separated from each other). 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 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang as applied to claim 14 above under 35 USC §102, and further in view of Yu et al., US 20190237341 A1, hereafter Yu. Regarding Claim 18, Zhang discloses the limitations of claim 14, as detailed above, Zhang fails to discloses: The method according to claim 14, wherein the first hard mask includes oxide, and the second hard mask includes carbon. Yu discloses the following: The method according to claim 14, wherein the first hard mask includes oxide (Yu, Figure 1A, tin oxide mandrels 101), and the second hard mask includes carbon (Yu, Figure 1C, spacer material 109, [0091] discloses SiC, SiOC, SiCNO, and SiCN for spacer 109). Zhang discloses a semiconductor method containing all the steps and materials except for the use of a first hard mask that incudes oxide and a second hard mask that include carbon. Yu discloses the use of a first hard mask containing and oxide and a second hard mask containing carbon in a method where the first hard mask in removed and the second hard mask is used to etch the material below this method is similar to the method of Zhang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the mask materials of Yu are known equivalents to the materials of Zhang. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the known material of Yu in for the other known materials of Zhang resulting in the predictable formation of mask with properties, such as etch selectivity, suitable for the process of Zhang. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-13 are allowed. Independent claim 1 is allowable because the closest prior art does not appear to disclose, alone or in combination, the limitations of: A method of making a device where a first hard mask is formed on a semiconductor substrate, a core is formed over the hard mask, where the core has a strip portion and a protruding portion, a spacer is formed surrounding the core, removing portions of the first hard mask exposed through the spacer and the protruding part of the core, forming a second hard mask surrounding the first hard mask and removing the first hard mask and portions of the substrate through the second hard mask to form a trench surrounding the active area. The closest prior art of record is Zhang et al., US 20180204731 A1. Zhang discloses a method where a second mask is deposited over a first mask, the first mask is removed and the second mask is used to etch the target. Zhang falls to disclose a core layer with a protrusion in the lateral direction formed on the first mask layer. The other prior art of record does not remedy this deficiently. The claims of the application at hand that depend from allowable claims are allowable because they respectively depend, directly or indirectly, from the allowable claims of the application at hand. Therefore, the dependent claims in question incorporate the allowable limitations of the claims from which they depend. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Brink et al., US 20170170272 A1, discloses the use of mandrels and spacers to form fins in a target layer. Yatsuda, US 11557661 B2, discloses a method of making isolated fin structures. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINDA J FLECK whose telephone number is (703)756-1253. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-4:30 ET, first Friday off. 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, William (Blake) Partridge can be reached at 571-270-1402. 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. /LINDA J. FLECK/Examiner, Art Unit 2812 /William B Partridge/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 19, 2022
Application Filed
Feb 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604670
IN-PACKAGE MAGNETIC SWITCHING USING GLASS CORE TECHNOLOGY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588477
SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURE AND FABRICATION METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588242
FIELD EFFECT TRANSISTOR WITH DUAL SILICIDE AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575112
NON-VOLATILE MEMORY DEVICE HAVING PN DIODE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12568633
HIGH-DENSITY THREE-DIMENSIONAL MULTILAYER MEMORY AND FABRICATION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+18.9%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 53 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month