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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of group II in the reply filed on 06/15/26 is acknowledged.
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.
Claims 12-20 are 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.
In the instant case in claims 12 and 16, sub-fins are defined. The term “sub-fin” relates to the fact that the fin-like structure is per definition located below the nanowire channel structures. Claims 12 and 16 define the opposite, i.e. sub-fin structures are formed over the channel or nanowire stack, which expresses the devices of claims 12 and 16. It appears that the integrated circuit structure is shown in a state when mounted face-down on a carrier substrate and the sub-fin is shown to be under the channel. However, an integrated circuit structure is normally understood to be a finished structure when it is turned upright. Clarification 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.
Claim(s) 12 and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Guler et al., US 2020/0219978.
Guler et al. shows the invention as claimed including an integrated circuit structure, comprising:
A channel structure (108a,108b,108c);
An oxide sub-fin structure 202 over the channel structure (flipped projection), the oxide sub-fin structure comprising silicon and oxygen and aluminum (note that the oxide sub-fin structure of Guler et al. will inherently contain these elements because the overlying oxidation catalyst layer that assists in forming the sub-fin layer through an oxidation process contains aluminum) (see, for example, figs. 1A-2 and paragraphs 0026-0043).
As to dependent claims 14-15, note that the channel structure is a plurality of horizontally stacked nanowires (108a,108b,108c) or a fin (see, for example, paragraph 0076).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 13 is is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guler et al., US 2020/0219978.
Guler et al. is applied as above but does not expressly disclose wherein the aluminum is less than 10 atomic percent of the oxide sub-fin structure. However, a prima facie case of obviousness exists because generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)
Claim(s) 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guler et al., US 2020/0219978 in view of Rachmady et al., US 2018/0337235.
Guler et al. is applied as above but does not expressly disclose a board; and a component coupled to the board and including the integrated circuit structure. Rachmady et al. discloses a board 122, and a component 102 coupled to the board (see figs. 2 and 7 and their descriptions). In view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the primary reference of Guler et al. so as to comprise the board/component configuration of Rachmady et al. because this is shown to be a conventional packaged configuration.
Regarding dependent claims 17-18, note that in Rachmady et al. a memory or communication chip coupled to the board (see figs. 2 and 7 of Rachmady and its description).
Concerning claims 19-20, note that in Rachmady the component 102 comprises the claimed structures.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Thomson et al., US 2023/0088578 discloses a stacked transistor with nanowire channels (see abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD A BOOTH whose telephone number is (571)272-1668. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8:30 to 5:00.
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, Christine Kim can be reached at 571-272-8458. 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.
/RICHARD A BOOTH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812
September 5, 2026
Prosecution Insights