Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/164,158

SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Feb 03, 2023
Examiner
RAHMAN, MOIN M
Art Unit
2898
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Changxin Memory Technologies Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
635 granted / 732 resolved
+18.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+14.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
46 currently pending
Career history
778
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
53.7%
+13.7% vs TC avg
§102
26.9%
-13.1% vs TC avg
§112
17.8%
-22.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 732 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . 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. Status of the application This office Action is in response to Applicant's Application filled on 10/25/2025. Claims 1-15 are pending for this examination. Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed on 05/17/2023. Oath/Declaration The oath or declaration filed on 03/30/2023 is acceptable. Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election of invention I, species. V, (Fig. [5]): claims 1-7 in the reply filed on 10/25/2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.03(a)). The election is without traverse because the response is incomplete. This office action considers claims 1-15 pending for prosecution, wherein claims 8-15 are withdrawn from further consideration, and 1-7 are presented for examination. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claims 1, 3 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al (US 2003/0230786 A1; hereafter Kim). PNG media_image1.png 360 595 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1. Kim discloses a semiconductor device (Fig [1-2]), comprising: a substrate (Fig [1-2], substrate 100, Para [ 0032]), comprising a first surface and a second surface opposite to each other (Fig 1, substrate 100, upper/lower surface, Para [ 0032]); a gate (Fig [1-2], gate structures 150 Para [ 0032]), located on the first surface of the substrate (Fig 1, substrate 100, Para [ 0032]); a source region and a drain region (Fig 1, source/drain junctions 105, Para [ 0033]), the source region (source/drain junctions 105, Para [ 0033]) being located in the substrate (Fig 1, substrate 100, Para [ 0032]) on one side of the gate (gate structures 150 Para [ 0032]), and the drain region (source/drain junctions 105, Para [ 0033]) being located in the substrate (Fig 1, substrate 100, Para [ 0032]) on another side of the gate (Fig 1, gate structures 150); and at least one anti-punchthrough structure (Fig 1, junction isolation insulating layers 125, construed as anti- punchthrough structure, based on the insulating material, Para [ 0035]), located in the substrate (Fig 1, substrate 100, Para [ 0032]) and comprising a third surface and a fourth surface opposite to each other (Fig 1, junction isolation insulating layers 125, upper/lower surface), wherein the third surface (Fig 1, junction isolation insulating layers 125, upper surface) is adjacent to the first surface and lower than the first surface (Fig 1, upper surface of substrate 100, Para [ 0032]), and the anti-punchthrough structure (Fig 1, junction isolation insulating layers 125) is located between the source region and the drain region (source/drain junctions 105, Para [ 0033]). Regarding claim 3. Kim discloses the semiconductor device of claim 1, Kim further discloses wherein the anti-punchthrough structure is T-shaped (Para [ 0035] discloses “The junction isolation insulating layers 125 are buried in the silicon substrate 100 and are vertically arranged under the gate structures 150 in the active region to form a T-shape with the channel regions”); and a width of the third surface of the anti-punchthrough structure is greater than a width of the fourth surface (T-shaped junction isolation insulating layers 125) . Regarding claim 7. Kim discloses the semiconductor device of claim 1, Kim further discloses wherein a material of the anti-punchthrough structure comprises an insulation material (Fig 1, junction isolation insulating layers 125, construed as anti- punchthrough structure, Para [ 0035]). Claim Rejection- 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 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. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (US 2003/0230786 A1; hereafter Kim). Regarding claim 2. Kim discloses the semiconductor device of claim 1, Kim further discloses wherein the anti-punchthrough structure (Fig 1, junction isolation insulating layers 125, construed as anti- punchthrough structure, Para [ 0035]) is located below the gate (Fig 1, gate structures 150). But Kim does not disclose explicitly a distance between the anti-punchthrough structure and the source region being equal to a distance between the anti-punchthrough structure and the drain region. However, Kim discloses “The junction isolation insulating layer 125 are preferably below substantially the central region of the gate structures 150 and are formed of an insulating layer to isolate the source and drain junctions 105 in a lateral direction”, Para [0011] and Fig [1-2] shows junction isolation insulating layers 125 are substantially equal distance formed between source/ drain regions 105. Therefore, it is obvious that, the distance between junction isolation insulating layers 125 and source, and between junction isolation insulating layers 125 and drain can be same. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify KIM equal distance between junction isolation insulating layers 125 and source and drain region in order to isolates source and drain junction to prevent lateral diffusion or junction expansion in the channel area. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (US 2003/0230786 A1; hereafter Kim) as applied claims above and further in view of Moll et al (US 2016/0268431 A1; hereafter Moll). Regarding claim 6. Kim discloses the semiconductor device of claim 1, But Kim does not disclose explicitly wherein a distance between the third surface of the anti-punchthrough structure and the first surface of the substrate is greater than 50 angstroms. In a similar field of endeavor, Moll discloses wherein a distance between the third surface of the anti-punchthrough structure and the first surface of the substrate is greater than 50 angstroms (claim 7discloses “a buried insulating material region disposed in said active region under said gate structure at a depth in a range from about 10-20 nm in said active region”. Therefore, the depth can be greater than 50 angstroms). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Kim in light of Moll teaching “wherein a distance between the third surface of the anti-punchthrough structure and the first surface of the substrate is greater than 50 angstroms (claim 7discloses “a buried insulating material region disposed in said active region under said gate structure at a depth in a range from about 10-20 nm in said active region”. Therefore, the depth can be greater than 50 angstroms)” for further advantage such isolates source and drain region to prevent lateral diffusion or junction expansion in the channel area. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4-5 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. The following is the Examiner's Reasons for Allowance: The prior art fails to disclose and would not have rendered obvious: Regarding claim 4. wherein the semiconductor device comprises two anti-punchthrough structures, each of the two anti-punchthrough structures is located below the gate, wherein a distance between the anti-punchthrough structure adjacent to the source region and the source region is equal to a distance between the anti-punchthrough structure adjacent to the drain region and the drain region. Regarding claim 5. wherein the semiconductor device comprises a plurality of anti-punchthrough structures, the plurality of anti-punchthrough structures are symmetrically distributed with respect to a central axis of the gate, wherein distances between the anti-punchthrough structures and the first surface successively increase in a direction from the central axis to the source region or the drain region. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOIN M RAHMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5002. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00pm. 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, Julio Maldonado can be reached at 571-272-1864. 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. /MOIN M RAHMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2898
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 03, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604603
LIGHT-EMITTING ELEMENT AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598775
Source/Drains In Semiconductor Devices and Methods of Forming Thereof
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593504
TRANSISTORS WITH VARYING WIDTH NANOSHEET
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588382
Color stable multicolor OLED device structures
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581727
ELECTRONIC CIRCUIT AND SEMICONDUCTOR MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
87%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+14.6%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 732 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month