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
Group I was elected. Claims 4-5, 8 and 11-20 have been cancelled. Claims 1, 6-7 and 9-10 have been amended. Claim 1-3, 6-7 and 9-10 are pending.
Action on merits of Elected Invention, claims 1-3, 6-7 and 9-10 follows.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on May 30, 2025 was filed after the mailing date of the Office Action on May 28, 2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawing was received on July 26, 2025. The drawing is acceptable.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “a silicide layer on a surface of the interlayer insulating layer and on an outer surface of the first contact, the silicide layer comprising titanium; … , and a lowermost surface of the cover layer is in contact with the first contact and the silicide layer, ...” (emphasis added) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 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.
Claims 1-3, 6-7 and 9-10 are 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.
There does not appear to be a written description of the claim limitation “a silicide layer on a surface of the interlayer insulating layer and on an outer surface of the first contact, the silicide layer comprising titanium; … , and a lowermost surface of the cover layer is in contact with the first contact and the silicide layer, ...” (amended claim 1) (emphasis added) in the application as filed.
Note that, layer 160 is a titanium layer, not a silicide.
Therefore, claim 1 contains new matters.
Applicant must cancel the un-support new matters in response to the Office Action.
Claims 1-3, 6-7 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Amended Claim 1 recites: “a silicide layer on a surface of the interlayer insulating layer and on an outer surface of the first contact, the silicide layer comprising titanium; … , and a lowermost surface of the cover layer is in contact with the first contact and the silicide layer, ...”.
However, the layer 160 is a deposited metal, titanium (not a silicide) and subsequently under a thermal process to form silicide where the metal contacts silicon surface(s), hence the name silicide.
Therefore, there is no “silicide layer” on the surface of the interlayer insulating layer 181 or on an outer surface of the first contact. or a lowermost surface of the cover layer is in contact with the first contact and the silicide layer,”.
Regarding the limitation “a lowermost surface of the cover layer is in contact with the first contact and the silicide layer”, the lowermost surface of the cover layer is spaced way from the first contact 183 by the metal layer 160.
Thus, the “lowermost surface of the cover layer is never in contact with the first contact”.
Therefore, the claim fails to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
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.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) 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.
Amended Claim 9 recites the limitation "the transistor of claim 1, further comprising: a buffer layer having the second conductivity type on the collector layer and the cathode layer".
There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Therefore, claim 9 is indefinite.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Amended claim 10 recites: “the transistor of claim 1, wherein the cover layer at least partially covers an uppermost surface of the first contact”.
However, amended claim 1 has already claimed: “a cover layer on the interlayer insulating film and the first contact in first cell region”
According to claim 1, since the cover layer on the first contact, it is obvious that “the cover layer at least partially covers the uppermost surface of the contact”.
Therefore, claim 10 fails to further limit claim 1.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-3, 6-7 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HARADA (US. Pub. No. 2020/0058645) of record, in view of HSHIEH (US. Pub. No. 2008/0169505) and FUJII (US. Pub. No. 2005/0145899).
With respect to claim 1, As best understood by the Examiner, HARADA teaches a reverse-conducting insulated gate bipolar transistor, substantially as claimed, the transistor including:
a collector electrode (24) on a substrate (10);
a collector layer (22) on or in contact with the collector electrode (24) in a first cell region (70);
a cathode layer (82) on or in contact with the collector electrode (24) in a second cell region (80);
a drift region (18) on or over the collector layer (22) and the cathode layer (82);
a plurality of trench gates (30) extending from a surface of the substrate in the first cell region (70) and second cell region (80), and spaced apart from each other;
a body region (14) on or over the drift region (18) and between adjacent trench gates (30) in the first cell region (70) and the second cell region (80);
an emitter region (12) on or at the surface of the substrate and on the body region (14) in the first cell region (70);
a body contact region (15) adjacent to the emitter region (12) and in the substrate;
an interlayer insulating film (26) on the substrate in the first cell region (70);
a first contact (54) through the interlayer insulating film (26), the first contact (54) comprising tungsten;
an emitter electrode (52) on the interlayer insulating film (26), the first contact (54), and the surface of the substrate in the second cell region (80). (Se FIG. 3).
Thus, HARADA is shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of explicitly disclosing: a cover layer on the interlayer insulating film; and a silicide layer.
However, HSHIEH ‘505 teaches a semiconductor device including:
a first contact (237) through an interlayer insulating film (210/230), the first contact (237) comprising tungsten;
a cover layer (256) on the interlayer insulating film and the first contact in first cell region; and
a barrier layer (255) on a surface of the interlayer insulating layer and on an outer surface of the first contact, the barrier layer comprising titanium;
wherein an uppermost surface of the cover layer (256) is in contact with the emitter electrode (260), and a lowermost surface of the cover layer (256) is in contact with the first contact (237) and the barrier layer, and
the lowermost surface of the cover layer (256) is flat along a horizontal direction. (See FIG. 10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to form the reverse-conducting insulated gate bipolar transistor of HARADA including the cover layer between the interlayer insulating layer and the emitter electrode to prevent inter diffusion between the metal layers.
Further FUJII teaches a semiconductor device including:
a silicide layer (15b) on a surface of the interlayer insulating film (6/8/10) and on an outer surface of first contact (16), the silicide layer comprising titanium. (See FIGs. 8 and 14).
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 contact of HARADA including the barrier/silicide layer as taught by HSIEH and FUJII to reduce contact resistant.
Thus, in view of HSIEH and FUJII, an uppermost surface of the cover layer is in contact with the emitter electrode, and a lowermost surface of the cover layer is in contact with the first contact and the silicide layer.
With respect to claim 2, the transistor of HARADA further comprises: a barrier region (45) on or below the body region (14) and on the drift region (18) in the first cell region and the second cell region. (See FIG. 13).
With respect to claim 3, in view of HSIEH and FUJII, an uppermost surface of the body contact region (221 and 12) is lower than the surface of the substrate.
With respect to claim 6, in view of HSIEH, the cover layer (256) comprise a conductive metal.
With respect to claim 7, in view of HSIEH, the cover layer (256) comprises a nitride film, an oxide film, or a combination thereof.
With respect to claim 9, As best understood by the Examiner, the transistor of HARADA further comprises: a buffer layer (20) having the second conductivity type on the collector layer (22) and the cathode layer (82).
With respect to claim 10, in view of HSIEH, the cover layer (256) at least partially covers an uppermost surface of the first contact (237).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 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 at 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