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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on January 30, 2026 has been entered.
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 16 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.
The claimed limitation of "a first insulating layer extending along a top surface of the first word line and a top surface of the second word line laterally surrounded by the barrier layer", as recited in claim 16, is unclear as to which element laterally surrounded by the barrier layer applicant refers.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (2023/0038881).
As for claim 1, Kim et al. show in Figs. 1, 2A-2C (except gate structure), 5D and related text a semiconductor device, comprising:
a substrate 101;
a first word line 120C (left one, Fig. 2A) in the substrate;
a barrier layer 110/109 cupping an underside of the first word line, wherein the barrier layer is a silicon oxide layer (Fig. 5D; [0032]; [0039]; [0077]);
a first insulating layer 131’ extending along a top surface of the first word line and laterally surrounded by the barrier layer, wherein the first insulating layer has a first top surface, the barrier layer has a second top surface, the first top surface of the first insulating layer is level with the second top surface of the barrier layer (Fig. 5D); and
a second insulating layer 132’ on the first insulating layer and laterally surrounded by the barrier layer, wherein the second insulating layer has a material different from a material of the first insulating layer ([0076]).
As for claim 2, Kim et al. show the first insulating layer cupping an underside of the second insulating layer (Fig. 5D).
As for claim 3, Kim et al. show the first insulating layer extends along an inner sidewall of the barrier layer (Fig. 5D).
As for claim 4, Kim et al. show the barrier layer and the first insulating layer include a same material (silicon oxide, [0032], [0076]).
As for claim 5, Kim et al. show a second word line 120C (right one, Fig. 2A) in the substrate, wherein the second word line has a height (arbitrarily chosen) different from a height (arbitrarily chosen) of the first word line.
As for claim 6, Kim et al. show the first insulating layer extends along a top surface of the second word line (Fig. 5D).
As for claim 8, Kim et al. show the first insulating layer has a U-shape in a cross section (Fig. 5D).
As for claim 9, Kim et al. show the first insulating layer comprises silicon nitride ([0076]).
As for claim 10, Kim et al. show the first insulating layer comprises silicon oxide ([0076]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 16 is allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record does not teach or suggest, singularly or in combination, at least the limitations of “the first insulating layer on the second word line has a top surface higher than a top surface of the first insulating layer on the first word line”, as recited in claim 16.
Claim 16 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 30, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that “Kim fails to disclose the aforementioned distinguishing features of "the barrier laver is a silicon oxide laver" and "the first top surface of the first insulating laver is level with the second top surface of the barrier layer”” because “Amended claim 1 clearly described that the barrier layer is formed in its entirety from a single material (silicon oxide)” and “the hard mask layer 109 (made of fluorine-containing silicon oxide) and the gate electrode 110 (made of fluorine-free silicon oxide) are made of different materials. Therefore, the hard mask layer 109 and the gate electrode 110 cannot be jointly compared to the claimed barrier layer”.
The examiner respectfully disagrees for the following reasons:
First, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., the barrier layer is formed in its entirety from a single material (silicon oxide)) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Second, it is noted that the transitional term “comprising” is inclusive or open-ended and does not exclude additional, unrecited elements, it is a term of art used in claim language which means that the named elements are essential, but other elements may be added and still form a construct within the scope of the claim (see MPEP §2111.03).
Furthermore, a broad limitation does not require that the barrier layer is formed by a single layer of pure silicon oxide.
Therefore, Kim discloses the limitation of “the barrier layer is a silicon oxide layer; and the first top surface of the first insulating laver is level with the second top surface of the barrier layer”, as recited in claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEIYA LI whose telephone number is (571)270-1572. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7AM-3PM.
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, LYNNE GURLEY can be reached at (571)272-1670. 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.
/MEIYA LI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2811