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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Applicant points to Figs. 6-8(b) and corresponding specification description as the support for the amendments to claim 1. However, it is unclear how Figs. 6-8(b) or the specification paragraphs related to these figures (of which only paragraphs [0035]-[0036] discuss the spacer 1027 at issue in the claim language amended into claim 1) provide support for the limitations "a first portion of the gate spacer, which is located between adjacent nanowires nanosheets among the plurality of nanowires nanosheets in the vertical direction and is located between a bottommost nanowire nanosheet among the plurality of nanowires nanosheets and the substrate, is self-aligned in the vertical direction with a second portion of the gate spacer other than the first portion, so that sidewalls of the gate spacer facing the gate electrode are substantially coplanar with each other in the vertical direction, and a sidewall of the gate spacer facing away from the gate electrode is substantially coplanar in the vertical direction with a sidewall of the nanowire nanosheet" as amended into claim 1. Figs. 6-8(b) and the specification paragraphs related to these figures do not discuss first or second portions and sidewalls of spacer 1027 in the orientational relationships recited in claim 1. Only paragraph [0036] mentions a “sidewall of the spacer 1027 may be substantially coplanar with the sidewall of the hard mask layer 1023 (and the sidewalls of the nanowires/nanosheets 1009, 1013),” but even this disclosure is insufficient to support the limitations amended into claim 1. Claims 2-3, 5-8, 15-21, 23 and 36-37 are similarly rejected due to their dependency upon claim 1. However, claims 1-3, 5-8, 15-21, 23 and 36-37 will nevertheless be examined as best understood.
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 1 is also 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. Specifically, regarding the limitation “sidewalls of the gate spacer facing the gate electrode are substantially coplanar with each other in the vertical direction,” it is unclear how plural vertical sidewalls of a single gate spacer can be coplanar with each other. Claims 2-3, 5-8, 15-21, 23 and 36-37 are similarly rejected due to their dependency upon claim 1. However, claims 1-3, 5-8, 15-21, 23 and 36-37 will nevertheless be examined as best understood.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments submitted January 20, 2026 have been fully considered. Specifically, Applicant substantively amended claim 1 and submitted corresponding arguments. Examiner agrees that amended claim 1, as best understood, would be allowed but for the 35 USC 112 rejections outlined above. Understanding that depending on how the claims are amended to overcome the 35 USC 112 rejections, the changes could result in prior art again reading on the claims. None of the references uncovered in the art, including Yeh, Lie, and US 2022/0037520 A1 to More et al. (hereinafter “More” – newly cited reference), disclose, teach or suggest "a first portion of the gate spacer, which is located between adjacent nanowires nanosheets among the plurality of nanowires nanosheets in the vertical direction and is located between a bottommost nanowire nanosheet among the plurality of nanowires nanosheets and the substrate, is self-aligned in the vertical direction with a second portion of the gate spacer other than the first portion, so that sidewalls of the gate spacer facing the gate electrode are substantially coplanar with each other in the vertical direction, and a sidewall of the gate spacer facing away from the gate electrode is substantially coplanar in the vertical direction with a sidewall of the nanowire nanosheet" as amended into claim 1, as best understood. While Yeh does not disclose “the gate spacer comprises a ferroelectric or negative capacitance material layer,” it does suggest as much given Yeh’s spacer 246 is shaped and oriented in the same manner as disclosed in Applicant’s invention and Yeh’s ferroelectric layer 262 is disposed adjacent the spacer 246, electrode 264, and nanowire sheet layers 222, 224 which on its own would render this limitation obvious, particularly in view of Applicant’s specification paragraph [0037] stating that the dielectric 1029 may be ferroelectric and spacer 1027 may be conventional dielectric spacer. Claims 2-3, 5-8, 15-21, 23 and 36-37 would also be allowed, but for the 35 USC 112 rejections, due to their dependency upon claim 1.
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 IAN DEGRASSE whose telephone number is (571) 272-0261. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:30a until 5:00p.
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, JEFF NATALINI can be reached on (571) 272-2266. 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. 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.
/IAN DEGRASSE/Examiner, Art Unit 2818
/JEFF W NATALINI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2818