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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-12 and 20 in the reply filed on 11/03/2025 is acknowledged.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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.
Claims 1 and 3-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by SUNG [US 2023/0164977].
With respect to claim 1, SUNG (fig. 1A-1E) discloses a semiconductor device, comprising:
an array of vertical transistors each comprising a semiconductor body (121, pp [0033]) extending in a vertical direction;
a plurality of word lines (124, pp [0035]) each extending along a first lateral direction and comprising a plurality of gate structures (124U,124L, pp [0046]) of a row of the array of vertical transistors arranged in the first lateral direction; and
a plurality of bit lines (110, 111, pp [0035]) each extending along a second lateral direction different from the first lateral direction and comprising silicide (111, pp [0040]).
With respect to claim 3, SUNG (fig. 1A-1E) discloses wherein: each bit line comprises a silicide line (111, pp [0040]) having a first thickness in the vertical direction and a metal line (110, pp [0039]) having a second thickness greater than the first thickness in the vertical direction.
With respect to claim 4, SUNG (fig. 1A-1E) discloses wherein: the silicide is a metal silicide (111, pp [0040]) including at least one element from Co, Ti, and Ni.
With respect to claim 5, SUNG (fig. 1A-1E) discloses further comprising: an array of memory cells each comprising: one of the vertical transistors; and a storage unit (130, pp [0035]) coupled with a first end of the semiconductor body of the one of the vertical transistors, wherein a second end of the semiconductor body (121, pp [0033]) of the one of the vertical transistors is coupled with one corresponding bit line (110, 111, pp [0035]).
With respect to claim 6, SUNG (fig. 1D) discloses wherein: each bit line (110, 111, pp [0035]) is coupled with a common region at the second ends of the semiconductor bodies of a pair of vertical transistors.
With respect to claim 7, SUNG (fig. 1K) discloses wherein: a plurality of first spacers (26, pp [0076]) each extending along the first lateral direction between pairs of the vertical transistors.
With respect to claim 8, SUNG (fig. 1K) discloses wherein: the plurality of word lines (124, pp [0035]) are embedded in the plurality of first spacers (26, pp [0076]); and two adjacent word lines are embedded in one same first spacer.
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.
Claims 2 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SUNG [US 2023/0164977] in view of Pola et al [US 2023/0276639].
With respect to claim 1, SUNG does not disclose wherein: each bit line comprises a silicide line having a thickness in the vertical direction in a range between about 10 nm and about 30 nm. However, Pola et al (fig. 5) disclose each bit line comprises a silicide line (501, pp [0085]) having a thickness in the vertical direction in a range between 10 -100 Angstroms. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art to have the thickness range as taught by Pola et al into the device of SUNG in order to reduce the intermixing of the conductor and the electrode (pp [0086]). Moreover, the thickness range would have been obvious to an ordinary artisan practicing the invention because, absent evidence of disclosure of criticality for the range giving unexpected results, it is not inventive to discover optimal or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). Furthermore, the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed dimensions of any unexpected results arising therefrom. Where patentability is aid to be based upon particular chosen dimensions or upon another variable recited in a claim, the Applicant must show that the chosen dimensions are critical. See In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
With respect to claim 20, SUNG (fig. 1A-1E) discloses a semiconductor system, comprising:
an array of memory cells each comprising:
a vertical transistor each comprising a semiconductor body (121, pp [0033]) extending in a vertical direction, and
a storage unit (130, pp [0035]) in electrical connection with a first end of the semiconductor body;
a plurality of word lines (124, pp [0035]) each extending along a first lateral direction and comprising a plurality of gate structures (124U,124L, pp [0046]) of a row of vertical transistors arranged in the first lateral direction; and
a plurality of bit lines (110, 111, pp [0035]) each extending along a second lateral direction different from the first lateral direction and comprising silicide (111, pp [0040]).
SUNG does not disclose a memory controller configured to control the array of memory cells through the plurality of word lines and the plurality of bit lines. However, Pola et al (fig. 1) disclose a memory controller (126, pp 0048]) configured to control the array of memory cells through the plurality of word lines (122, pp 0038]) and the plurality of bit lines (122, pp 0038]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art to have the memory controller as taught by Pola et al into the device of SUNG in order to send the command to the controller of the partition (122, pp [0048]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-12 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOAI V PHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-1715. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30a.m-10:00p.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, Drew Richards can be reached at 571-271-1736. 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.
/HOAI V PHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2892