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 § 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, 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-17 & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. (US 20200020587) in view of Kim et al. (US 20170092758).
Regarding claim 1, Cheng discloses that a three-dimensional field-effect transistor (3DSFET) device comprising:
a 1st source/drain region 13 (Fig. 1-C); and
a 2ⁿᵈ source/drain region 15 stacked on the 1st source/drain region 13 in a 1st direction.
Cheng fails to teach that the 1st source/drain region has an asymmetric shape comprising a protrusion at a 2ⁿᵈ upper corner portion among a 1st upper corner portion and the 2ⁿᵈ upper corner portion opposite to each other in a 2nd direction intersecting the 1st direction, wherein the protrusion does not overlap the 2ⁿᵈ source/drain region in the 1st direction.
However, Kim suggests that a shape of source/drain F5r can be an asymmetric shape with protrusion (Fig. 18).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of applicant(s) claimed invention was made to provide Cheng with a shape of source/drain can be an asymmetric shape with protrusion as taught by Kim in order to enhance carrier mobility and also, the claim would have been obvious because a particular know technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art.
The combination of Cheng & Kim disclose that the 1st source/drain region has an asymmetric shape comprising a protrusion at a 2ⁿᵈ upper corner portion among a 1st upper corner portion and the 2ⁿᵈ upper corner portion opposite to each other in a 2nd direction intersecting the 1st direction, wherein the protrusion does not overlap the 2ⁿᵈ source/drain region in the 1st direction.
PNG
media_image1.png
756
455
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Reclaim 2, Cheng & Kim disclose that the protrusion is formed on around a center of a top surface of the 1st source/drain region, in a 3rd direction intersecting the 1st direction (Cheng in view of Kim’s Fig 18, note: a 3rd direction can be through direction between the 1st & 2nd direction).
Reclaim 3, Cheng & Kim disclose that the 2ⁿᵈ upper corner portion is in a shape in which the 2ⁿᵈ upper corner portion is protruded in at least a vertical the 1st direction, when viewed in both the 2nd direction and 3rd direction intersecting the 1st direction (note: can be modified by Kim’s shape of source/drain).
Reclaim 4, Cheng & Kim disclose that the 2ⁿᵈ upper corner portion is protruded in the 2ⁿᵈ direction (Chen in view of Kim’s Fig. 18).
Reclaim 5, Cheng & Kim disclose that the 2ⁿᵈ upper corner portion is protruded in a 4th direction, which is diagonal to the 1st and 2ⁿᵈ directions direction, when viewed in view2nd direction (Cheng in view of Kim).
Reclaim 6, Cheng & Kim disclose that the 2ⁿᵈ upper corner portion is in a shape in which the 2ⁿᵈ upper corner portion is protruded in at least a 2ⁿᵈ direction, which is perpendicular to the 1st direction, in the 2nd direction (Chen in view of Kim’s Fig. 18).
Reclaim 7, Cheng & Kim disclose that the protrusion comprises a 2ⁿᵈ doping of p-type impurities or n-type impurities that is greater than a 1st doping of p-type impurities or n-type impurities of the 1st upper corner portion (Chen in view of Kim’s Fig. 18).
Reclaim 8, Cheng & Kim disclose that a contact structure 36 or 34 connected to the protrusion (Chen in view of Kim’s Fig. 18).
Reclaim 9, Cheng & Kim disclose that a width of the 2ⁿᵈ source/drain region is smaller than a width of the 1st source/drain region, in the 2ⁿᵈ direction (Chen in view of Kim’s Fig. 18).
Reclaim 10, Cheng & Kim disclose that a three-dimensional field-effect transistor (3DSFET) device comprising:
a 1st source/drain region 13 ; and
a 2ⁿᵈ source/drain 15 region stacked above the 1st source/drain region in a 1st direction, wherein the 1st source/drain region has a deformed shape at a 2ⁿᵈ upper corner portion among a 1st upper corner portion (Cheng in view of Kim’s S/D shape) and the 2ⁿᵈ upper corner portion opposite to each other, in a 2ⁿᵈ direction intersecting the 1st direction, such that the 1st source/drain region is asymmetrical about an axis that is parallel to the 1st direction through a central portion thereof (Chen in view of Kim’s Fig. 18).
Reclaim 11, Cheng & Kim disclose that the 1st source/drain region 13 has a greater height in the 1st direction at the 2ⁿᵈ upper corner portion than at the 1st upper corner portion, in the 2nd direction (Cheng in view of Kim).
Reclaim 12, Cheng & Kim disclose that rein the 1st source/drain region has a greater width at a top surface portion than at a bottom surface portion, in the 2ⁿᵈ direction (Chen in view of Kim’s Fig. 18)..
Reclaim 13, Cheng & Kim disclose that the 1st source/drain region has a greater width at a top surface portion than at a bottom surface portion, in the 2nd direction (Chen in view of Kim’s Fig. 18).
Reclaim 14, Cheng & Kim disclose that the 1st source/drain region has a protrusion on around a center of a top surface of the 1st source/drain region, in a 3rd direction intersecting the 1st direction(Chen in view of Kim’s Fig. 18).
Reclaim 15, Cheng & Kim disclose that the 2ⁿᵈ upper corner portion comprises a 2ⁿᵈ doping of p-type impurities or n-type impurities that is greater than a 1st doping of p-type impurities or n-type impurities of the 1st upper corner portion (Chen in view of Kim’s Fig. 18).
Reclaim 16, Cheng & Kim disclose that a method of manufacturing three-dimensional field-effect transistor (3DSFET) device, the method comprising:
forming, on a substrate, a 1st source/drain region 13 and a 2ⁿᵈ source/drain region 15 above the 1st source/drain region in a 1st direction; and
structuring the 1st source/drain region such that the 1st source/drain region has an asymmetric shape (Kim’s Fig. 18) comprising a protrusion at a 2ⁿᵈ upper corner portion among a 1st upper corner portion and the 2ⁿᵈ upper corner portion opposite to each other in 2nd direction intersecting the 1st direction, wherein the protrusion does not overlap the 2ⁿᵈ source/drain region in the 1st direction (Cheng in view of Kim’s Fig. 18).
Reclaim 17, Cheng & Kim disclose that a width of the 2ⁿᵈ source/drain region is smaller than a width of the 1st source/drain region, in the 2nd direction (Cheng in view of Kim’s Fig. 18).
Reclaim 20, Cheng & Kim disclose that the protrusion of the 1st source/drain region comprises a shape that extends in the 1st direction, the 2ⁿᵈ direction, and a 3ʳᵈ direction that is diagonal to the 1st and 2ⁿᵈ directions, when viewed in 2nd direction (Cheng in view of Kim’s Fig. 18).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18-19 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SU C KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-5972. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 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, Dale Page can be reached at 571-270-7877. 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.
/SU C KIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights