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 Group I which corresponds to claims 1-10 in the reply filed on 07/01/2024 is acknowledged. Claims 11-20 are withdrawn from further consideration, pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Inventions or Species.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/20/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 6, 7 and 10 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.
Regarding Claim 6 and claim 7, the claims recite “a line extending in the first direction” Subsequently, both claim 6 and clam 7 reference “the line” to define the relative positioning of the second and fifth active pattern groups. However, these claim fail to define whether “the line” represents a physical structure or a purely mathematical/geometric abstraction boundary. A claim is indefinite if it relies on a reference point that is not clearly anchored to the physical boundaries of the device. If “the line” is an arbitrary geometric construct, the metes and bounds of the claim cannot be determined by of ordinary skill in the art, therefore it is indefinite.
Regarding Claim 10, the claimed limitation “the least one first active pattern” and “the least one second active pattern” lack of antecedent basis and cannot be traced back to the dependency chain to have the definition of “a least one active pattern” and “a least one second active pattern”. Therefore, it is indefinite.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by SIO et.al. (US-20200357786-A1,hereinafter SIO)
Regarding Claim 1.
PNG
media_image1.png
543
810
media_image1.png
Greyscale
SIO teaches in Fig. 2, Fig.13 and Fig. 14 and in related text An integrated circuit comprising:
a first cell in a first row (Fig.14 cells in LP row #1410/#1430/#1450) and a second cell in a second row (Fig.14 cells in HP row #1420/#1440), wherein the first and second rows are adjacent to each other and extend in a first direction (direction X); and
a third cell (Fig.13 combined cell #1310/#1320/#1330/#1340 and Fig.14 combined HLP cells as annotated) in the first row and the second row,
wherein each of the first cell and the second cell comprises a first active pattern group including at least one first active pattern that extends in the first direction and has a first conductivity type (Fig.2 active region and Fig.14 active regions #1412)
the third cell comprises a second active pattern group including at least one second active pattern that extends in the first direction in the first row and has the first conductivity type (Fig.14 active regions of first conductive type extending in X direction), and
an effective channel width of the second active pattern group (middle active pattern of 3rd cell with combined #1422 + #1432 as annotated) is wider than an effective channel width of the first active pattern group (active region in layer #1422 or #1432 of the first and second cells). (See Sio Fig. 2, 13, 14 [0115-0127])
Regarding Claim 2.
SIO teaches The integrated circuit of claim 1,
SIO further teaches wherein each of the first cell and the second cell further comprises a third active pattern group including at least one third active pattern that extends in the first direction and has a second conductivity type (Fig.2 and Fig.14 active region in layer #1414/#1424/#1434),
the third cell further comprises a fourth active pattern group including at least one fourth active pattern (active pattern of #1424 and #1434 of 3rd cell) that extends in the first direction in the second row and has the second conductivity type, and
an effective channel width of the fourth active pattern group is wider than an effective channel width of the third active pattern group (top active region #1424 as shown in the annotated Figure 14 which has a different conductive type, and are wider than the third active region #1424/#1434 of 1st and second cells in Fig.14). (See Sio Fig. 2, 13, 14 [0115-0127])
Regarding Claim 3.
SIO teaches The integrated circuit of claim 2,
SIO further teaches in Fig.14 wherein the third cell further comprises at least one gate electrode (Fig.14 [0127] #1470 gate patterns) that extends in a second direction that is perpendicular to the first direction, and the at least one gate electrode overlaps the second active pattern group and the fourth active pattern group in a third direction that is perpendicular to the first direction and the second direction. (Gate electrode patterns extending in Y direction in 3rd cell)
Regarding Claim 5.
SIO teaches The integrated circuit of claim 1,
PNG
media_image2.png
526
885
media_image2.png
Greyscale
SIO further teaches in Fig.14 further comprising a fourth cell (as annotated in Fig.14 above) in the first row and the second row,
wherein the fourth cell (annotated above in Fig.14) comprises a fifth active pattern group including at least one fifth active pattern that extends in the first direction in the first row and has the first conductivity type (region #1422 in 4th cell), and
an effective channel width of the fifth active pattern group (region #1422 in 4th cell) is different from the effective channel width of the second active pattern group (region #1422+#1432 combined in 3rd cell).
Regarding Claim 9.
SIO teaches The integrated circuit of claim 1,
SIO also teaches in Fig.14 further comprising first and second gates (gate structure #1470) extending in a second direction (direction Y) that is perpendicular to the first direction,
wherein the first gate (gate structure #1470) overlaps the at least one first active pattern (active pattern in 1st cell) in a third direction (Z direction) that is perpendicular to the first direction (X direction) and the second direction (Y direction), and the second gate (gate structure #1470) overlaps the at least one second active pattern (active pattern in 3rd cell) in the third direction. (vertical gate structure extending along Y direction and overlaps with both active regions of cell 1 and cell 3)
Regarding Claim 10.
SIO teaches The integrated circuit of claim 1,
SIO further teaches further comprising first and second gates (gate structure #1470) extending in a second direction (Y direction) that is perpendicular to the first direction,
wherein the least one first active pattern (active pattern in cell 1) comprises a first nanosheet passing through the first gate, and the least one second active pattern (active pattern in cell 3) comprises a second nanosheet passing through the second gate. (Sio discloses repeatedly and explicitly that its mixed-row-height cell architecture applies directly to gate-all-around (GAA) nan-sheet and nano-wire device technologies. for example[0031])
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SIO et.al. (US-20200357786-A1,hereinafter SIO), and further in view of Gheewala et. al. (US-6838713-B1, hereinafter Gheewala)
Regarding Claim 4.
SIO teaches The integrated circuit of claim 1,
SIO further teaches further comprising a first power line that extends in the first direction on a boundary between the first row and the second row and is shared by the first cell and the second cell, ([0056] rails #270-1 through #270-7 in Fig. 2B running in the Y direction at boundaries between cells, and third cell is a merged version of row 1 and row 2)
SIO does not explicitly disclose wherein the first power line passes through the third cell.
However, in an analogous art in the same field of endeavor, Gheewala teaches in Fig.3 wherein the first power line (#340) passes through the third cell (cell #320)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify SIO’s semiconductor device with the teachings of Gheewala, as identified above, as this is an well-established feature in the art as default power delivery solution for layout containing multi-row spanning cells such as Sio’s HLP merged cells.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 is 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.
Claims 6-7 are rejected. Claims 6-7 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AlA), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 6 contains allowable subject matter, because the prior art, either singly or in combination, fails to anticipate or render obvious, the device, wherein the second active pattern group and the fifth active pattern group each comprise a boundary overlapping a line extending in the first direction and are between the line and the second row. These features in combination with the other elements of the claim are neither disclosed nor suggested by the prior art of record.
Claim 7 contains allowable subject matter, because the prior art, either singly or in combination, fails to anticipate or render obvious, the device, wherein
the second active pattern group and the fifth active pattern group each comprise a boundary overlapping a line extending in the first direction, and the line is between the second active pattern group and the second row and is between the fifth active pattern group and the second row. These features in combination with the other elements of the claim are neither disclosed nor suggested by the prior art of record.
Claim 8 contains allowable subject matter, because the prior art, either singly or in combination, fails to anticipate or render obvious, the device, wherein the second active pattern group and the fifth active pattern group comprise respective centers in a second direction that is perpendicular to the first direction, and the centers of the second active pattern group and the fifth active pattern group are aligned along the first direction. These features in combination with the other elements of the claim are neither disclosed nor suggested by the prior art of record.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
GUO et. al. (US-20210224457-A1).
LEE et. al. (US-20220058326-A1)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SOPHIA W KAO whose telephone number is (703)756-4797. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm Pacific Time.
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, Eliseo Ramos-Feliciano can be reached at (571) 272-7925. 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.
/SOPHIA W KAO/Examiner, Art Unit 2817
/RATISHA MEHTA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817