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.
Claims 8-13 and 21-29 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 pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 8, the claim recites “the p-type intermediate region extends laterally from under the source region toward the drain region by a second distance greater than the first distance to a PN junction under the gate electrode” however the specification shows in Fig. 2G the intermediate region 244 being separated from the n-type region 212 by a separate part of the back gate region so that it doesn’t extend laterally all the way to a pn junction as claimed. Examiner noted that for the purpose of examination that the claims will be interpreted so that the terms body regions and intermediated regions may be considered to include surrounding portions of the substrate with similar doping type.
Regarding claim 22, the claim recites “the body region forming a first PN junction with the source region that intersects the top surface“, “the body region extends laterally from the intersection of the first PN junction with the top surface toward the drain region by a first distance to a second PN junction with the drift region” and “the intermediate region extends laterally from under intersection toward the drain region by a second distance greater than the first distance to the second PN junction” however the specification shows in Fig. 2G the body region 246 being separated from the top surface and from n-type region 212 so that it is not forming a first PN junction with the source region that intersects the top surface or extending laterally from the intersection of the first PN junction with the top surface to a second PN junction with the drift region. Furthermore Fig, 2G shows the intermediate region 244 being separated from the n-type region 212 by a separate part of the back gate region so that it doesn’t extend laterally to a pn junction as claimed. Furthermore there is no written description of these features
Regarding claims 9-13, 21 and 23-29, the claims are dependent on and require all the limitations of claim 8 or 22 and are therefore rejected for the same reason as claim 8 or 22.
Drawings
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 “the p-type intermediate region extends laterally from under the source region toward the drain region by a second distance greater than the first distance to a PN junction under the gate electrode” of claim 8 and the “the body region forming a first PN junction with the source region that intersects the top surface“, “the body region extends laterally from the intersection of the first PN junction with the top surface toward the drain region by a first distance to a second PN junction with the drift region” and “the intermediate region extends laterally from under intersection toward the drain region by a second distance greater than the first distance to the second PN junction” of claim 22 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 § 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 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 of this title, 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 8-13 and 21-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rumennik et. Al. ) US 20030025155 A1hereinafter Rumennik).
Regarding claim 8, Rumennik teaches in Fig. 3 with associated text a transistor, comprising:
a p-type substrate 16 having a top surface and a p-buried layer (PBk and PBk’) (Fig. 3);
an n-type source region 14 and an n-type drain region 19 in the substrate and a gate electrode 12 positioned between the source region and the drain 5region;
an n-type drain drift region 17 between the PBL and the drain region and extending under a first portion of the gate electrode (Fig. 3);
a p-type body region 15 between the PBL and the source region and extending under a second portion of the gate electrode (Fig. 3); and
10a p-type intermediate region (region 65 not shown that is between PB2’ and PBk’ for example PB3’ paragraph [0050], Fig. 3) and between the PBL and the p-type body region (Fig. 3), wherein:
the p-type body region extends laterally from under the source region toward the drain region by a first distance Fig. 3);
15the p-type intermediate region extends laterally from under the source region toward the drain region by a second distance.
Rumennik does not specify in the embodiment of Fig. 3 that the p-type intermediate region extends a second distance that is greater than the first distance to a PN junction under the gate electrode.
Rumennik discloses in an embodiment in Fig. 14 with associated text a similar device wherein a p-type intermediate region 88 extends laterally from under a source 14 toward a drain 19 by a second distance of a PN junction (junction between pburied layer 88 and N-type material in opening 81 (Fig. 14, [0057])) under the gate electrode greater than a first distance that a p-type body region 15 extends laterally from under the source toward the drain by (Fig. 14) so that by using a p-type intermediate region similar to that of the embodiment of Fig. 14 for at least the p-type intermediate region of the embodiment of Fig. 3 the second distance would be greater than the first distance.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to us a p-type intermediate region similar to that of the embodiment of Fig. 14 in the embodiment of Fig. 3 because according to Rumennik such a structure permits the design of short IGFET channel lengths (paragraph [0057]).
PNG
media_image1.png
313
801
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Rumennik teaches the p-type body region has a first peak horizontal dopant concentration (15 includes at least a portion of PB2’ and so has a first peak horizontal dopant concentration) at a first depth below the top surface (see figure below), and the p-type intermediate region has a second peak horizontal dopant concentration at a 5second depth (see figure below) greater than the first depth below the top surface;
the n-type drift region has a third horizontal peak dopant concentration (peak at N2) at a third depth below the top surface that is less than the first depth (see figure below); and the n-type drift region has a fourth horizontal peak dopant 10concentration (peak between PB2 and intermediate layer for example N3 not shown Fig. 3) at a fourth depth between the first and second depths (see Figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
487
600
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Rumennik teaches the first horizontal peak dopant concentration is greater than the second horizontal peak dopant concentration (see figure above).
Regarding claim 11, Rumennik teaches an isolation 15structure 40 between the gate electrode and the drain region (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 12, Rumennik teaches a portion of the n-type drain drift region is located between the p-type intermediate region and the gate electrode (since the p-type intermediate region extends into the drain drift region Fig. 14 a portion of the n-type drift region is located between the p-type intermediate region and the gate electrode).
Regarding claim 13, Rumennik teaches a portion of the n-type drain drift 20region having the fourth horizontal peak concentration is located vertically between the top surface and a portion of the intermediate region having the second horizontal peak concentration (see figure above).
Regarding claim 21, Rumennik teaches a lateral distance from the source region to the PN junction has a local maximum distance under the gate electrode (See annotated figure above).
Regarding claim 22, Rumennik teaches in Fig. 3 with associated text transistor, comprising: a semiconductor substrate 16 having a top surface and a buried layer (BL) having a first conductivity type (p-type) (PBk and PBk’) (Fig. 3); a source region 14 and a drain region 19 in the substrate and a gate electrode 12 positioned over the top surface between the source region and the drain region, the source and drain regions having an opposite second conductivity type (n-type) (Fig. 3); a body region (15 and portion of 16 adjacent thereto) having the first conductivity type, the body region located between the BL and the source region and extending from the source region toward the drain region, the body region forming a first PN junction with the source region that intersects the top surface (Fig. 3); a drift region 17 having the second conductivity type, the drift region located between the BL and the drain region and extending from the drain region toward the body region (Fig. 3); and an intermediate region (region 65 not shown that is between PB2’ and PBk’ for example PB3’ paragraph [0050], Fig. 3) between the BL and the body region, the intermediate region having the first conductivity type (Fig. 3), wherein: the body region extends laterally from the intersection of the first PN junction with the top surface toward the drain region by a first distance to a second PN junction with the drift region (Fig. 3 and see annotated Fig. above); and the intermediate region extends laterally from under intersection toward the drain region by a second distance.
Rumennik does not specify in the embodiment of Fig. 3 that the intermediate region extends a second distance that is greater than the first distance to the second PN junction.
Rumennik discloses in an embodiment in Fig. 14 with associated text a similar device wherein a p-type intermediate region 88 extends laterally from under a source 14 toward a drain 19 by a second distance of a PN junction (junction between pburied layer 88 and N-type material in opening 81 (Fig. 14, [0057])) under the gate electrode greater than a first distance that a p-type body region 15 extends laterally from under the source toward the drain by (Fig. 14) so that by using a p-type intermediate region similar to that of the embodiment of Fig. 14 for at least the p-type intermediate region of the embodiment of Fig. 3 the second distance would be greater than the first distance.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to us a p-type intermediate region similar to that of the embodiment of Fig. 14 in the embodiment of Fig. 3 because according to Rumennik such a structure permits the design of short IGFET channel lengths (paragraph [0057]).
Regarding claim 23, Rumennik teaches the body region has a first peak horizontal dopant concentration (15 includes at least a portion of PB2’ and so has a first peak horizontal dopant concentration) at a first depth below the top surface, and the intermediate region has a second peak horizontal dopant concentration (see figure above) at a second depth greater than the first depth below the top surface; the drift region has a third horizontal peak dopant concentration (see Figure above) at a third depth below the top surface that is less than the first depth; and the drift region has a fourth horizontal peak dopant concentration at a fourth depth between the first and second depths (see Figure above)..
Regarding claim 24, Rumennik teaches the first horizontal peak dopant concentration is greater than the second horizontal peak dopant concentration (see Figure above).
Regarding claim 25, Rumennik teaches an isolation structure 40 between the gate electrode and the drain region (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 26, Rumennik teaches a portion of the drift region is located between the intermediate region and the gate electrode (Fig. 14).
Regarding claim 27, Rumennik teaches a portion of the drift region having the fourth horizontal peak dopant concentration is located vertically between the top surface and a portion of the intermediate region having the second horizontal peak dopant concentration (see figure above).
Regarding claim 28, Rumennik teaches the first conductivity type is p-type and the second conductivity type is n-type (Figs. 3 and 14).
Regarding claim 29, Rumennik teaches a lateral distance from the first PN junction to the second PN junction has a local maximum distance under the gate electrode (See annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
313
801
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding the arguments on pages 5-6 Rumennick teaches a p-type intermediate region 88 extends laterally from under a source 14 toward a drain 19 by a second distance of a PN junction (junction between p-buried layer 88 and N-type material in opening 81 (Fig. 14, [0057])) under the gate electrode greater than a first distance that a p-type body region 15 extends laterally from under the source toward the drain by (Fig. 14) as discussed in the rejection of claim 8 above.
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Denison (US 20040108549 A1) teaches a device in Fig. 1 that is relevant to the claims having body 4, intermediate 16 and buried 17 regions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON J GRAY whose telephone number is (571)270-7629. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9am-4pm.
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, Toledo Fernando can be reached on 5712721867. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AARON J GRAY/Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights