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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because of the following:
In Figure 1, is reference number 148 (gate) pointing to the correct item? The drawing shows reference number 148 pointing to what appears to be the channel of the transistor.
Applicants’ Figure 1 (portion):
PNG
media_image1.png
560
442
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In Figure 1, is reference number 248 (gate) pointing to the correct item? The drawing shows reference number 248 pointing to what appears to be the channel of the transistor.
Applicants’ Figure 2 (portion):
PNG
media_image2.png
535
439
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Page 25, paragraph 80, line 5: Change “batter” to “battery”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-9 in the reply filed on April 16, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claims 4-6 and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 4, line 2: Add “capacitor” after “each”.
Claims 5 and 6 are objected to for depending from objected-to base claim 4.
Claim 5, line 1: After “each” add “capacitor”.
Claim 6 is objected to for depending from objected-to base claim 5.
Claim 6, line 1: Add “capacitor” after “each”.
Claim 8, line 1: Please provide antecedent basis for “the insulator”. Antecedent basis has not been provided for this term in claim 8 or its parent claim, claim 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 8 is 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.
Regarding claim 8, which depends from claim 1: Claim 8 refers to “the insulator” in line 1, but the insulator has not been defined in either claim 1 or claim 8. (An insulator is defined in claim 3.) Because the insulator lacks antecedent basis in claim 1 and claim 8, claim 8 is rejected as indefinite. For purposes of examination, claim 8 will be interpreted as depending from claim 3.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 7, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cooper, U.S. Pat. No. 5,465,249, Figure 5A.
PNG
media_image3.png
278
399
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1: Cooper Figure 5A discloses a dynamic random-access memory (DRAM) comprising: a transistor (76) that includes a source (66), a drain (68), and a body (64), wherein the body (64) includes a selected one or more of: silicon (Si) and carbon (C) or gallium (Ga) and nitrogen (N) (SiC); and a capacitor (80) electrically coupled with the transistor (76). Cooper specification, col. 7, l. 36 – col. 8, l. 34.
Regarding claim 2, which depends from claim 1: Cooper discloses the capacitor (80) is within a layer (64) that includes a selected one or more of: Si and C or Ga and N (SiC). Id. See also Cooper Figure 5(a).
Regarding claim 3, which depends from claim 1: Cooper discloses the capacitor (80) includes a first electrode (82), a second electrode (78), and an insulator (70), wherein the insulator (70) electrically isolates the first electrode (82) and the second electrode (78) from each other, and wherein the first electrode (82) is electrically coupled with the drain (68) or with the source (66) (coupled to the drain (68)). Cooper specification, col. 7, l. 65 – col. 8, l. 7.
Regarding claim 7, which depends from claim 1: Cooper discloses the transistor (76) is a selected one of: a field effect transistor, a nanowire transistor, a planar transistor, or a silicon on insulator transistor (field effect transistor). Id. col. 7, ll. 60-64.
Regarding claim 8, which depends from claim 3,1 which depends from claim 1: Cooper discloses the insulator (70) includes a selected one or more of: a dielectric, an oxide, or a ferroelectric. Id. col. 7, l. 65 – col. 8, l. 2.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6 and 9 are 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, and if the informalities were addressed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With regard to claim 4: The claim has been found allowable because the prior art of record does not disclose “the capacitor includes a plurality of capacitors, wherein the first electrode of each [capacitor] of the plurality of capacitors are electrically coupled with each other”, in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim.
With regard to claims 5 and 6: The claims have been found allowable due to their dependency from claim 4 above.
With regard to claim 9: The claim has been found allowable because the prior art of record does not disclose “the DRAM is a portion of a wafer scale engine (WSE)”, in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTORIA KATHLEEN HALL whose telephone number is (571)270-7567. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8 a.m.-5 p.m.
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, Fernando Toledo can be reached at 571-272-1867. 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.
/Victoria K. Hall/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
1 As presented, claim 8 depends from claim 1, but as noted in the Section 112(b) rejections, the insulator in claim 8 lacks antecedent basis. Per the discussion in the Section 112(b) rejection, the Office is interpreting claim 8 as depending from claim 3, which defines an insulator.
Prosecution Insights