Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/315,232

N-DIPOLE MATERIAL FOR STACKED TRANSISTORS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 10, 2023
Examiner
HOANG, TUAN A
Art Unit
2898
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
364 granted / 497 resolved
+5.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
519
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
51.4%
+11.4% vs TC avg
§102
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
§112
20.1%
-19.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 497 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of invention I, claims 1-16, in the reply filed on 10/10/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 21-24 are added. Specification The amendment to the specification submitted on 10/10/2025 is acknowledged. No new material is added, thus, the specification is entered. 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. Claims 1-2, 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pao et al. (US 2021/0391439 A1). Regarding claim 1, Pao teaches a method (100 in Fig. 1 of Pao) for forming a gate stack (metal gate 236 in Fig. 15) of a transistor (410 in Fig. 15), wherein the transistor forms a portion of a transistor stack (transistor stack is from substrate 202 to gate 236), the method comprising: forming a high-k dielectric layer (222 in Fig. 5, as described in [0028] of Pao); forming an n-dipole dopant source layer (dipole layer 224 in Fig. 7) over the high-k dielectric layer; performing a thermal drive-in process (anneal process 300 in Fig. 13) that drives an n-dipole dopant (lanthanum, yttrium or aluminum, as described in [0034]) from the n-dipole dopant source layer into the high-k dielectric layer (as described in [0034]); and after removing the n-dipole dopant source layer (step 120 of method 100 in Fig. 1), forming at least one electrically conductive gate layer (work function layer and metal fill layer of the metal gate stack 236, as described in [0038] of Pao) over the high-k dielectric layer. But Pao does not explicitly teach that wherein a drive-in temperature of the thermal drive-in process is less than 600°C. However Pao discloses that the temperature range of the anneal process 300 is between 500°C to 900°C (see [0034] of Pao). This range overlaps the claim range of “less than 600°C”. Therefore, it would have been obvious at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have made the temperature range of the anneal process 300 to be less than 600°C in order to minimize the thermal damage to the device. See In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); and In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Regarding claim 2, Pao teaches all limitations of the method of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein the drive-in temperature of the thermal drive-in process is about 300°C to about 500°C. However Pao discloses that the temperature range of the anneal process 300 is between 500°C to 900°C (see [0034] of Pao) which touches the claimed range of “about 300°C to about 500°C”. Therefore, it would have been obvious at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have made the temperature range from about 300°C to about 500°C, since it has been held that in the case where the claimed ranges “do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985); see also In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP §2144.05.I for more details). Regarding claim 7, Pao teaches all limitations of the method of claim 1, and further comprising forming an interfacial layer (220 in Fig. 4 of Pao) before forming the high-k dielectric layer, wherein the interfacial layer and the high-k dielectric layer form a gate dielectric of the gate stack (as shown in Fig. 15 of Pao). Claims 3-6, 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pao as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Savant et al. (US 2021/0391220 A1). Regarding claim 3, Pao teaches all limitations of the method of claim 1, and also teaches wherein the n-dipole dopant is a metal (lanthanum, yttrium or aluminum, as described in [0030] of Pao), the n-dipole dopant source layer includes the metal and oxygen (as described in [0030] of Pao), but does not explicitly teach the n-dipole dopant provides the n-dipole dopant source layer with metal-oxygen bonds having a bond dissociation energy that is less than a bond dissociation energy of lanthanum-oxygen bonds. Savant discloses that high-k dielectric layer can have n-type dopants such as erbium, strontium, magnesium… to improve n-type performance of nFETs (see [0040] and Figs. 1J, 1K of Savant). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used dopants such as erbium, strontium, or magnesium in order to have higher melting temperature (hence less susceptible to heat damage). The limitation “having a bond dissociation energy…” is a property of the material, see [0043] of the public specification. Since the material of the prior art matches those of the claims, the prior art structure is assumed to have the same properties. Regarding claim 4, Pao teaches all limitations of the method of claim 1, but does not teach wherein the n-dipole dopant is strontium. Savant discloses that high-k dielectric layer can have n-type dopants such as strontium to improve n-type performance of nFETs (see [0040] and Figs. 1J, 1K of Savant). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used dopants such as strontium in order to have higher melting temperature (hence less susceptible to heat damage). Regarding claim 5, Pao teaches all limitations of the method of claim 1, but does not teach wherein the n-dipole dopant is erbium. Savant discloses that high-k dielectric layer can have n-type dopants such as erbium to improve n-type performance of nFETs (see [0040] and Figs. 1J, 1K of Savant). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used dopants such as erbium in order to have higher melting temperature (hence less susceptible to heat damage). Regarding claim 6, Pao teaches all limitations of the method of claim 1, but does not teach wherein the n-dipole dopant is magnesium. Savant discloses that high-k dielectric layer can have n-type dopants such as magnesium to improve n-type performance of nFETs (see [0040] and Figs. 1J, 1K of Savant). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used dopants such as magnesium in order to have higher melting temperature (hence less susceptible to heat damage). Regarding claim 8, Pao teaches all limitations of the method of claim 7, but does not teach the method further comprising tuning parameters of the thermal drive-in process to provide the gate dielectric with a desired n-dipole dopant profile along a thickness of the gate dielectric, wherein a peak of the desired n-dipole dopant profile is located at an interface between the high-k dielectric layer and the interfacial layer ± 0.5 nm, and further wherein the peak of the desired n-dipole dopant profile corresponds with a location in the gate dielectric having a maximum n-dipole dopant concentration. Savant teaches a method of doping a high-k dielectric layer of a gate structure. The dopant is diffused through the high-k gate dielectric layer so that the peak of the dopant is located at the interface of the interfacial oxide layer and the high-k gate dielectric layer. This forms a dipole layer at the interface of the interfacial oxide layer and the high-k gate dielectric layer (see Fig. 1O of Savant). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have tuned the annealing process of the dopant to obtain the dopant profile such as Savant’s disclosure in order to have maximized the dipole effect, and therefore obtain a more effective tuning of the threshold voltage. Claims 9, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chung et al. (CN 113675197 A) (for the purpose of compact prosecution, the US Application US 2022/0037497 A1 is used hereinafter as an English translation of the Chinese application) in view of Pao. Regarding claim 9, Chung teaches a method (1100 in Figs. 85-98C of Chung) comprising: forming a first transistor (lower transistor 260a) of a transistor stack (260a-260b); bonding (step 1126 in Fig. 85) the first transistor of the transistor stack to a precursor (204b in Fig. 96A-C) for fabricating a second transistor (260b) of the transistor stack; and forming the second transistor (260b) over the first transistor, wherein the forming the second transistor includes processing the precursor (as shown in Figs. 96A-97C), forming a gate stack (254b in Fig. 97A) of the second transistor, wherein the gate stack includes a gate dielectric (256) and a gate electrode (258). But Chung does not teach that the method comprising: performing a dipole engineering process, wherein the dipole engineering process includes: forming an n-dipole dopant source layer over the gate dielectric, performing a thermal drive-in process that drives an n-dipole dopant from the n-dipole dopant source layer into the gate dielectric, wherein a drive-in temperature of the thermal drive-in process is less than 600°C, and removing the n-dipole dopant source layer. Pao teaches a method (100 in Fig. 1 of Pao) for forming a gate stack (metal gate 236 in Fig. 15) of a transistor (410 in Fig. 15), wherein the transistor forms a portion of a transistor stack (transistor stack is from substrate 202 to gate 236), the method comprising: forming a high-k dielectric layer (222 in Fig. 5, as described in [0028] of Pao); forming an n-dipole dopant source layer (dipole layer 224 in Fig. 7) over the high-k dielectric layer; performing a thermal drive-in process (anneal process 300 in Fig. 13) in the range of 500°C to 900°C to drive an n-dipole dopant from the n-dipole dopant source layer into the high-k dielectric layer (as described in [0034]); removing the n-dipole dopant source layer (step 120 of method 100 in Fig. 1); and forming a gate structure (work function layer and metal fill layer of the metal gate stack 236, as described in [0038] of Pao) over the high-k dielectric layer. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have diffused appropriate dipole dopant into the top transistor, as disclosed by Pao, so that the threshold voltage can be fine-tuned to match the device’s needs. In the situation where the top transistor is n-type and bottom transistor is p-type, it would be obvious to have diffused the n-type dipole dopant into the second transistor. As incorporated, since the claimed ranges of “less than 600°C” overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); and In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Regarding claim 15, Chung in view of Pao teaches all limitations of the method of claim 9, and also teaches wherein: the dipole engineering process is a first dipole engineering process (as combined in claim 9 above), the thermal drive-in process is a first thermal drive-in process (as combined in claim 9 above), the gate dielectric is a first gate dielectric (as combined in claim 9 above), the gate electrode is a first gate electrode (as combined in claim 9 above), and the gate stack is a first gate stack (as combined in claim 9 above); and the forming the first transistor includes forming a second gate stack (254a in Fig. 94A of Chung) of the first transistor and performing a second dipole engineering process (Pao’s dopant diffusing process as applied in claim 9 above), wherein the second gate stack includes a second gate dielectric (256 of 254a) and a second gate electrode (258 of 254a), and further wherein the second dipole engineering process includes: forming a p-dipole dopant source layer (224 of Pao for the p-type dipole dopant) over the second gate dielectric of the second gate stack of the first transistor, performing a second thermal drive-in process (anneal process 300 in Fig. 13 of Pao ) that drives a p-dipole dopant from the p-dipole dopant source layer into the second gate dielectric, and removing the p-dipole dopant source layer (step 120 of method 100 in Fig. 1 of Pao). Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chung in view of Pao, and further in view of Savant. Regarding claim 16, Chung in view of Pao teaches all limitations of the method of claim 15, and also teaches wherein: and the p-dipole dopant is aluminum (as described in [0030] of Pao). But Chung in view of Pao does not teach that wherein the n-dipole dopant is strontium, erbium, magnesium, or a combination thereof. Savant discloses that high-k dielectric layer can have n-type dopants such as erbium, strontium, magnesium… to improve n-type performance of nFETs (see [0040] and Figs. 1J, 1K of Savant). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used dopants such as erbium, strontium, or magnesium in order to have higher melting temperature (hence less susceptible to heat damage). Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chung in view of Pao. Regarding claim 21, Chung teaches a method (1100 in Figs. 85-98C of Chung) comprising: forming a first device (lower transistor 260a in Fig. 94A) of a device stack (260a-b), wherein the first device includes a first semiconductor layer (lower nanowire channel 208 in Fig. 94A) that extends between a first source/drain (228S in Fig. 93A) and a second source/drain (228D), wherein the first device further includes a first gate stack (254a) disposed on the first semiconductor layer, wherein the first gate stack includes a first gate dielectric (256 of 254a) and a first gate electrode (258 of 254a); and after forming the first device of the device stack, forming a second device (260b in Fig. 97A) of the device stack on the first device of the device stack, wherein the second device includes a second semiconductor layer (one of the upper nanowire channel 208 in Fig. 97A) that extends between a third source/drain (248S) and a fourth source/drain (248D), wherein the second device further includes a second gate stack (254b) disposed on the second semiconductor layer, wherein the second gate stack includes a second gate dielectric (256 of 254b) and a second gate electrode (258 of 254b), wherein the forming of the second device of the device stack includes performing a gate replacement process (as described in [0150]), wherein the gate replacement process includes: removing a dummy gate (as described in [0150] lines 20-22 of Chung) to form a gate opening (opening formed by the removal of dummy gate), wherein the gate opening exposes the second semiconductor layer, forming the second gate dielectric (256 of 254b in Fig. 97A) around the second semiconductor layer, wherein the second gate dielectric partially fills the gate opening (as shown in Fig. 97A). But Chung does not teach that the gate replacement process including: forming an n-dipole dopant source layer over the second gate dielectric, wherein the n-dipole dopant source layer partially fills the gate opening and the n- dipole dopant source layer is formed around the second semiconductor layer, driving an n-dipole dopant from the n-dipole dopant source layer into the second gate dielectric, wherein a drive-in temperature is less than 600°C, and after removing the n-dipole dopant source layer, forming the second gate electrode over the second gate dielectric, wherein the second gate electrode fills a remainder of the gate opening and the second gate electrode is formed around the second semiconductor layer. Pao teaches a method (100 in Fig. 1 of Pao) for forming a gate stack (metal gate 236 in Fig. 15) of a transistor (410 in Fig. 15), wherein the transistor forms a portion of a transistor stack (transistor stack is from substrate 202 to gate 236), the method comprising: forming a high-k dielectric layer (222 in Fig. 5, as described in [0028] of Pao); forming an n-dipole dopant source layer (dipole layer 224 in Fig. 7) over the high-k dielectric layer; performing a thermal drive-in process (anneal process 300 in Fig. 13) in the range of 500°C to 900°C to drive an n-dipole dopant from the n-dipole dopant source layer into the high-k dielectric layer (as described in [0034]); removing the n-dipole dopant source layer (step 120 of method 100 in Fig. 1); and forming a gate structure (work function layer and metal fill layer of the metal gate stack 236, as described in [0038] of Pao) over the high-k dielectric layer. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have diffused appropriate dipole dopant into the top transistor, as disclosed by Pao, so that the threshold voltage can be fine-tuned to match the device’s needs. In the situation where the second device is n-type, it would have been obvious to have diffused the n-type dipole dopant into the second transistor. As incorporated, since the claimed ranges of “less than 600°C” overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); and In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Regarding claim 22, Chung in view of Pao teaches all limitations of the method of claim 21, and also teaches wherein the gate replacement process further includes performing a planarization process (as implied by the levelness of the top surfaces of the gates and the ILD in Fig. 15 of Pao) to remove the second gate dielectric and the second gate electrode from over a top of an interlayer dielectric layer. Claims 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chung in view of Pao, as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Savant. Regarding claim 23, Chung in view of Pao teaches all limitations of the method of claim 21, and also teaches wherein the n-dipole dopant is a metal (lanthanum, yttrium or aluminum, as described in [0030] of Pao), the n-dipole dopant source layer includes the metal and oxygen (as described in [0030] of Pao), but does not teach that the n-dipole dopant provides the n-dipole dopant source layer with metal-oxygen bonds having a bond dissociation energy that is less than a bond dissociation energy of lanthanum-oxygen bonds. Savant discloses that high-k dielectric layer can have n-type dopants such as erbium, strontium, magnesium… to improve n-type performance of nFETs (see [0040] and Figs. 1J, 1K of Savant). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used dopants such as erbium, strontium, or magnesium in order to have higher melting temperature (hence less susceptible to heat damage). The limitation “having a bond dissociation energy…” is a property of the material, see [0043] of the public specification. Since the material of the prior art matches those of the claims, the prior art structure is assumed to have the same properties. Regarding claim 24, Chung in view of Pao teaches all limitations of the method of claim 21, and also teaches wherein: the second gate dielectric includes a high-k dielectric layer (2221 in Fig. 15 of Pao) and an interfacial layer (220 in Fig. 15 of Pao); but does not teach that the method further includes tuning parameters of the driving to provide the second gate dielectric with a desired n-dipole dopant profile along a thickness of the second gate dielectric, wherein a peak of the desired n-dipole dopant profile is located at an interface between the high- k dielectric layer and the interfacial layer ± 0.5 nm, and further wherein the peak of the desired n-dipole dopant profile corresponds with a location in the second gate dielectric having a maximum n-dipole dopant concentration. Savant teaches a method of doping a high-k dielectric layer of a gate structure. The dopant is diffused through the high-k gate dielectric layer so that the peak of the dopant is located at the interface of the interfacial oxide layer and the high-k gate dielectric layer. This forms a dipole layer at the interface of the interfacial oxide layer and the high-k gate dielectric layer (see Fig. 1O of Savant). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have tuned the annealing process of the dopant to obtain the dopant profile such as Savant’s disclosure in order to have maximized the dipole effect, and therefore obtain a more effective tuning of the threshold voltage. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 10-14 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 a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 10, the prior art of record does not disclose or fairly suggest a method comprising: “wherein the second dipole engineering process includes: forming a second n-dipole dopant source layer over the second gate dielectric of the second gate stack of the first transistor” along with other limitations of the claim. Regarding claim 13, the prior art of record does not disclose or fairly suggest a method comprising: “wherein the second dipole engineering process includes: forming a second n-dipole dopant source layer over the second gate dielectric of the second gate stack of the first transistor” along with other limitations of the claim. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUAN A HOANG whose telephone number is (571)270-0406. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-9am, 10am-6pm EST. 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, Jessica Manno can be reached at (571) 272-2339. 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. /Tuan A Hoang/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2898
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 10, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12568677
METHOD OF SELF-ALIGNED DIELECTRIC WALL FORMATION FOR FORKSHEET APPLICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12568641
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE WITH VARYING NUMBERS OF CHANNEL LAYERS AND METHOD OF FABRICATION THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12563822
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12563761
Vertically Stacked Transistor Structures
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12563812
COMPOSITE GATE DIELECTRIC FOR HIGH-VOLTAGE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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
73%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+11.9%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 497 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