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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 09 April 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09 April 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant's argument that “Matsuura does not teach asymmetric bias modes” (Remarks p.9), a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
In response to Applicant's arguments against the references individually “Matsuura’s circuit lacks the structural configuration to deliver asymmetric simultaneous per-well bias states” (Remarks p.10), one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Applicant has not added any structural limitations to the claims that patently differentiate from the prior art, and the amendments have only included language drawn to the intended use of the structure by applying various operating “modes” that impart no structural differences from that of the prior art. MPEP 2114 II. Manner of operating the device does not differentiate apparatus claim from the prior art: “[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987)”. 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).
In response to Applicant’s statement that “De does not teach simultaneously applying forward bias to one well type and reverse bias to the other well type on the same die” (Remarks p.10). This is not persuasive. Not only is this the intended use of the device structure, but De also teaches these various operating modes in C8:L59 – C9:L10 (among other sections of the disclosure, as referenced in the rejection of claim 1 in the previous Office action at p. 7) that:
“It is not required that each transistor be in the forward or non-forward bias conditions at the same time. That is, some transistors may be forward body biased while other transistors are non-forward body biased.
Various embodiments of the present invention include static or quasi-static, limited and controlled forward body biasing of the body node of any/all pMOS or nMOS or both in any static/dynamic/differential MOS logic and memory circuitry implemented in bulk silicon. The term "static forward bias" means that the bias is constantly forward, regardless of whether the circuits are in active or standby modes. The term "quasi-static" means a forward body bias is applied during only a portion of the time, while a zero bias, substantially zero bias or reverse bias is applied during some other times. The bias voltage can be generated and distributed from a voltage source either on-chip or off-chip. Forward-biasing of different n-wells and p-wells by different amounts can be used to generate an assortment of n- and p-MOSFETs with varying degrees of leakage and drive currents on the same die.”
Additionally, De recites in C7:L13 – C8:L29 advantages of the disclosure of utilizing asymmetric bias modes:
“Relatively expensive process techniques have been used to provide different threshold voltages Vt to different transistors on a die. Preferred embodiments of the invention can eliminate additional masking steps and process complexities inevitable in a multiple-threshold-voltage process, and yield an assortment of n- and p-MOSFETs with varying degrees of leakage and drive currents on the same die at low cost.
There are at least two reasons why it may be desirable to apply different levels of body voltages to different transistors. First, applying a forward body bias may provide certain benefits such as increased switching speed and improved aspect ratio (explained below). However, it also increases leakage. For some circuits, such as those in a critical path where switching speed is important, the leakage can be tolerated. However, for other circuits, switching speed is not as important and the advantage of greater switching speed and improved aspect ratio does not justify the additional leakage. Second, there are certain circuits, such as at least some domino circuits where applying a forward body bias may degrade performance as well as increase leakage (which may degrade noise margin). Therefore, for many semiconductor circuits it would be desirable to have multiple body voltages to create multiple threshold voltages.
As an example of a dual Vt circuit (which is an example of a multiple Vt circuit), referring to FIG. 13, a forward body bias is applied to a first group of transistors (e.g., in a critical switching speed path) such that the transistors have a lower Vt than those of a second and third group. The bodies of transistors of a second and third group are tied, for example, to their respective sources and have a higher Vt. The second group is in a critical speed path. However, transistors of the second group may be in circuits (e.g., certain domino circuits) for which forward body biasing is not desirable because it might degrade performance (e.g., through worse noise margin). The third group of transistors is not in a critical switching speed path and is not forward biased (either to reduce leakage or because the transistors are in circuits for which forward body biasing is undesirable for additional reasons). Accordingly, the transistors of the first group have different threshold voltages Vt than do the transistors of the second and third groups, without processing the transistors differently other than through perhaps a trace to a body tap. The transistors are in an electronic device die 204, which may be, for example, a microprocessor, memory device, or communication device, etc. The voltages applied to the bodies may be generated on or off the die.
Rather than tie the body to the source or drain, another bias may be applied to the body of the transistors of the second and/or third groups or a portion of the transistors therein. In FIG. 14, voltages Vbbn and Vbbp resulting in a forward body bias are applied to the first group of transistors (of course, this could be changed during a standby mode). Voltages Vbbn and Vbbp resulting in another bias (reverse bias, zero bias, or lesser forward bias) are applied to at least some of the second and third group of transistors. (Some of the second and third group of transistors could have their bodies tied to the respective source or drain, while others are lesser forward or reverse biased, in which case there could be at least three sets of threshold voltages Vt.) There may be more or less than three groups. The transistors are in an electronic device die 206, which may be, for example, a microprocessor, memory device, or communication device, etc. The voltages applied to the bodies may be generated on or off the die.”
Matsuura teaches all of the structural limitations of the claimed PMOS/NMOS transistor structure, and is capable of body-biasing as required by the claims. Matsuura is silent about the power supply configuration. De teaches a power supply configuration that can be provided on or off die for applying symmetric or asymmetric body biasing to PMOS/NMOS transistors that are on a same die. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to utilize De’s power supply configuration and operating modes in the device of Matsuura for the above-noted advantages. The rejection as previously applied is proper and the amended claims do not add any structural limitations to overcome the prior art of record. As such, the rejection has been updated below according the amendment.
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 1-3, 8, 10-12, 17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daisuke Matsuura et al. (US 20200007124 A1; hereinafter Matsuura) in view of Vivek De et al. (US 6593799 B2; hereinafter De; wherein portions of the specification are referred to in column:line format, i.e. C1:L1--L5 is column 1 line 1 to line 5).
PNG
media_image1.png
606
862
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 1, Matsuura teaches a semiconductor device (Fig. 1) of a silicon on insulator type (¶0001) including:
an n-channel Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor (NMOS) transistor (Fig. 1; NMOS Transistor 18) in and on a first semiconductor film (Fig. 1; 26, 27, 28; ¶0030) separated from a P-type doped well (Fig. 1; P-Well 14; ¶0026) arranged in a carrier substrate (Fig. 1; 11; ¶0026) by a buried dielectric layer (Fig. 1; buried oxide film 16; ¶0027),
a p-channel Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor (PMOS) transistor (Fig. 1; PMOS Transistor 17) in and on a second semiconductor film (Fig. 1; 21, 22, 23; ¶0029) separated from an N-type doped well (Fig. 1; N-Well 13; ¶0026) arranged in the carrier substrate (11) by the buried dielectric layer (16), and
a power supply circuit (Fig. 8; 52; ¶0074) configured to:
generate voltages (Fig. 1 and Fig. 8; VBp and VBn) in the P-type doped well (14) and the N-type doped well (13) (as shown in Fig. 1; ¶0082), and
generate a first non-zero negative voltage in the P-type doped well (14; ¶0034) and a first non-zero positive voltage in the N-type doped well (13; ¶0034),
wherein the NMOS (18) and PMOS (17) transistors have voltages (this limitation is satisfied by meeting the structural limitations of the claim and in view of ¶0034 where VBp, which is applied to the n-well 13 by the power supply circuit 52, is set to a positive voltage while VBn, which is applied to the p-well 14 by the power supply circuit 52, is a negative voltage).
Matsuura does not expressly disclose the power supply circuit (52) is configured to selectively provide a neutral back bias condition (with a first non-zero negative voltage in the P-type doped well and a first non-zero positive voltage in the N-type doped well), a forward back bias condition and a reverse back bias condition to each of the NMOS transistor (18) and to the PMOS transistor (17), wherein, in a first asymmetric back bias mode, the NMOS transistor is in the forward back bias condition and the PMOS transistor is in the reverse back bias condition, and wherein, in a second asymmetric back bias mode, the NMOS transistor is in the reverse back bias condition and the PMOS transistor is in the forward back bias condition (of which these “modes” are the intended use of the device structure and impart no structural limitations to the claimed device, and therefore are implicitly satisfied by the structural features of the prior art; MPEP 2114 II), wherein the NMOS (18) and PMOS (17) transistors have nominal threshold voltages in the neutral back bias condition.
Although Matsuura is silent regarding the specific voltage configurations, in the same field of endeavor, De (in reference to the entire disclosure) teaches CMOS devices (C14:L29--L65) provided with an on-die or off-die (C7:L35--L55) power supply circuit (C8:L59--L62) capable of being configured to selectively and independently provide neutral (zero), forward, and reverse body biasing to any/all PMOS or NMOS transistors, or both, in any static/quasi-static/dynamic/differential MOS logic and/or memory circuitry wherein the transistors may have nominal threshold voltages in the “zero” or “neutral” bias (see De C7:L13—C9:L10; C12:L8--L32; C8:L29--C9:L10; C3:L43--L59) by providing various bias voltages to the respective wells. Wherein, in a first asymmetric back bias mode, the NMOS transistor is in the forward back bias condition and the PMOS transistor is in the reverse back bias condition, and wherein, in a second asymmetric back bias mode, the NMOS transistor is in the reverse back bias condition and the PMOS transistor is in the forward back bias condition (this is the intended use of the device, and De’s disclosure teaches these various configurations).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the physical transistor structures of Matsuura paired with the voltage generator/circuity/voltage configurations/bias of De to arrive at the claimed limitations in order to provide varying degrees of leakage and drive currents to an assortment of n- and p-MOSFETs on the same die at a low cost (C7:L13—C9:L10, entire disclosure).
Regarding Claim 2, modified Matsuura teaches the device according to claim 1, wherein the power supply circuit (52) is configured to generate, for the forward back bias condition, a voltage which is higher than the first non-zero negative voltage in the P-type doped well (14) and a voltage which is lower than the first non-zero positive voltage in the N-type doped well (13) (52 generates voltages, this limitation is drawn toward the manner of operation of the device, and without any additional structural limitations, this is implicitly satisfied by the structure of modified Matsuura. MPEP 2114).
Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the configurations of the disclosure of De to arrive at the claimed limitations in order to provide varying degrees of leakage and drive currents to an assortment of n- and p-MOSFETs on the same die (C8:L63—C9:L10).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Matsuura teaches the device according to claim 1, wherein the power supply circuit (52) is configured to generate, for the reverse back bias condition, a voltage which is lower than the first non-zero negative voltage in the P-type doped well (14) and a voltage which is higher than the first non-zero positive voltage in the N-type doped well (13) (52 generates voltages, this limitation is drawn toward the manner of operation of the device, and without any additional structural limitations, this is implicitly satisfied by the structure of modified Matsuura. MPEP 2114).
Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the configurations of the disclosure of De to arrive at the claimed limitations in order to provide varying degrees of leakage and drive currents to an assortment of n- and p-MOSFETs on the same die (C8:L63—C9:L10).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Matsuura teaches the device according to claim 1, wherein the NMOS (18) and PMOS (17) transistors include a respective channel region (28, 23 respectively) including a concentration of doping species (doped respectively, ¶0030, ¶0029) to modulate a work function of the respective channel region so as to obtain the nominal threshold voltages in the neutral back bias condition (without any additional structural limitations, this is implicitly satisfied by the structure of modified Matsuura with the applied voltages of claim 1. MPEP 2114).
Regarding Claim 10, Matsuura teaches a method for manufacturing a semiconductor device (Fig. 1) of a silicon on insulator type (¶0001), the method comprising:
forming an n-channel Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor (NMOS) transistor (Fig. 1; NMOS Transistor 18 is formed) in and on a first semiconductor film (Fig. 1; 26, 27, 28; ¶0030) separated from a P-type doped well arranged in a carrier substrate (Fig. 1; 11; ¶0026) by a buried dielectric layer (Fig. 1; buried oxide film 16; ¶0027);
forming a p-channel Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor (PMOS) transistor (Fig. 1; PMOS Transistor 17 is formed) in and on a second semiconductor film (Fig. 1; 21, 22, 23; ¶0029) separated from an N-type doped well (Fig. 1; N-Well 13; ¶0026) arranged in the carrier substrate (11) by the buried dielectric layer (16); and
forming a power supply circuit (Fig. 8; 52 is formed; ¶0074) capable of generating voltages (Fig. 1 and Fig. 8; VBp and VBn) in the P-type doped well (14) and the N-type doped well (13), wherein the power supply circuit (52) is capable of applying a first non-zero negative voltage to the P-type doped well (14) and a first non-zero positive voltage to the N-type doped well (13) (¶0034),
wherein the NMOS and PMOS transistors have voltages (this limitation is satisfied by meeting the structural limitations of the claim, and in view of ¶0034 where VBp, which is applied to the n-well 13 by the power supply circuit 52, is set to a positive voltage while VBn, which is applied to the p-well 14 by the power supply circuit 52, is a negative voltage).
Matsuura does not expressly disclose wherein the power supply circuit (52) capable of selectively providing a neutral back bias condition, a forward back bias condition and a reverse back bias condition to each of the NMOS transistor (18) and to the PMOS transistor (17), wherein the power supply circuit (52) causes the neutral back bias condition by applying a first non-zero negative voltage to the P-type doped well (14) and a first non-zero positive voltage to the N-type doped well (13), wherein, in a first asymmetric back bias mode, the NMOS transistor is in the forward back bias condition and the PMOS transistor is in the reverse back bias condition, and wherein, in a second asymmetric back bias mode, the NMOS transistor is in the reverse back bias condition and the PMOS transistor is in the forward back bias condition (of which these “modes” are the intended use of the device structure and impart no structural limitations to the claimed device, therefore are implicitly satisfied by the structural features of the prior art; MPEP 2114 II), and wherein the NMOS and PMOS transistors have nominal threshold voltages in the neutral back bias condition.
Although Matsuura is silent regarding the specific voltage configurations, in the same field of endeavor, De (in reference to the entire disclosure) teaches CMOS devices (C14:L29--L65) provided with an on-die or off-die (C7:L35--L55) power supply circuit (C8:L59--L62) capable of being configured to selectively and independently provide neutral (zero), forward, and reverse body biasing to any/all PMOS or NMOS transistors, or both, in any static/quasi-static/dynamic/differential MOS logic and/or memory circuitry wherein the transistors may have nominal threshold voltages in the “zero” or “neutral” bias (see De C7:L13—C9:L10; C12:L8--L32; C8:L29--C9:L10; C3:L43--L59) by providing various bias voltages to the respective wells. Wherein, in a first asymmetric back bias mode, the NMOS transistor is in the forward back bias condition and the PMOS transistor is in the reverse back bias condition, and wherein, in a second asymmetric back bias mode, the NMOS transistor is in the reverse back bias condition and the PMOS transistor is in the forward back bias condition (this is the intended use of the device, and De’s disclosure teaches these various configurations).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the physical transistor structures of Matsuura paired with the voltage generator/circuity/voltage configurations/bias of De to arrive at the claimed limitations in order to provide varying degrees of leakage and drive currents to an assortment of n- and p-MOSFETs on the same die at a low cost (C7:L13—C9:L10, entire disclosure).
Regarding Claim 11, modified Matsuura teaches the method according to claim 10, wherein the power supply circuit (52) causes the forward back bias condition by applying a voltage which is higher than the first non-zero negative voltage to the P-type doped well (14) and a voltage which is lower than the first non-zero positive voltage to the N-type doped well (13) (52 generates voltages, this limitation is drawn toward the manner of operation of the device, and without any additional structural or manufacturing limitations, this is implicitly satisfied by the structure, capability, and formation of the power supply of modified Matsuura. MPEP 2114).
Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the configurations of the disclosure of De to arrive at the claimed limitations in order to provide varying degrees of leakage and drive currents to an assortment of n- and p-MOSFETs on the same die (C8:L63—C9:L10).
Regarding Claim 12, modified Matsuura teaches the method according to claim 10, wherein the power supply circuit (52) causes the reverse back bias condition by applying a voltage which is lower than the first non-zero negative voltage to the P-type doped well (14) and a voltage which is higher than the first non-zero positive voltage applied to the N-type doped well (13) (52 generates voltages, this limitation is drawn toward the manner of operation of the device, and without any additional structural or manufacturing limitations, this is implicitly satisfied by the structure, capability, and formation of the power supply of modified Matsuura. MPEP 2114).
Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the configurations of the disclosure of De to arrive at the claimed limitations in order to provide varying degrees of leakage and drive currents to an assortment of n- and p-MOSFETs on the same die (C8:L63—C9:L10).
Regarding Claim 17, modified Matsuura teaches the method according to claim 10, wherein forming the NMOS (18) and PMOS (17) transistors includes forming a respective channel region (28, 23 respectively) including a concentration of doping species (doped respectively, ¶0030, ¶0029) to modulate a work function of the respective channel region to obtain the nominal threshold voltages in the neutral back bias condition (without any additional structural limitations or formation limitations, this is implicitly satisfied by the structure of modified Matsuura with the applied voltages of claim 10. MPEP 2114).
Regarding Claim 19, Matsuura teaches a semiconductor device (Fig. 1) of a silicon on insulator type (¶0001) including:
An n-channel Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor (NMOS) transistor (Fig. 1; NMOS Transistor 18) in and on a first semiconductor film (Fig. 1; 26, 27, 28; ¶0030) separated from a P-type doped well (Fig. 1; P-Well 14; ¶0026) arranged in a carrier substrate (Fig. 1; 11; ¶0026) by a buried dielectric layer (Fig. 1; buried oxide film 16; ¶0027); and
a p-channel Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor (PMOS) transistor (Fig. 1; PMOS Transistor 17) in and on a second semiconductor film (Fig. 1; 21, 22, 23; ¶0029) separated from an N-type doped well (Fig. 1; N-Well 13; ¶0026) arranged in the carrier substrate (11) by the buried dielectric layer (16).
Matsuura is silent regarding specifically wherein the NMOS transistor (18) and the PMOS transistor (17) being in a neutral back bias condition in response to a first non-zero negative voltage being applied to the P-type doped well and a first non-zero positive voltage being applied to the N-type doped well, and
wherein the NMOS and PMOS transistors have nominal threshold voltages in the neutral back bias condition (although the structure is capable in view of ¶0034 where VBp, which is applied to the n-well 13, is set to a positive voltage while VBn, which is applied to the p-well 14, is a negative voltage), wherein, in a first asymmetric back bias mode, the NMOS transistor is in the forward back bias condition and the PMOS transistor is in the reverse back bias condition, and wherein, in a second asymmetric back bias mode, the NMOS transistor is in the reverse back bias condition and the PMOS transistor is in the forward back bias condition (of which these “modes” are the intended use of the device structure and impart no structural limitations to the claimed device, therefore are implicitly satisfied by the structural features of the prior art; MPEP 2114 II).
Although Matsuura is silent regarding the specific voltage configurations, in the same field of endeavor, De (in reference to the entire disclosure) teaches CMOS devices (C14:L29--L65) provided with an on-die or off-die (C7:L35--L55) power supply circuit (C8:L59--L62) capable of being configured to selectively and independently provide neutral (zero), forward, and reverse body biasing to any/all PMOS or NMOS transistors, or both, in any static/quasi-static/dynamic/differential MOS logic and/or memory circuitry wherein the transistors may have nominal threshold voltages in the “zero” or “neutral” bias (see De C7:L13—C9:L10; C12:L8--L32; C8:L29--C9:L10; C3:L43--L59) by providing various bias voltages to the respective wells. Wherein, in a first asymmetric back bias mode, the NMOS transistor is in the forward back bias condition and the PMOS transistor is in the reverse back bias condition, and wherein, in a second asymmetric back bias mode, the NMOS transistor is in the reverse back bias condition and the PMOS transistor is in the forward back bias condition (this is the intended use of the device, and De’s disclosure teaches these various configurations).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the physical transistor structures of Matsuura paired with the voltage generator/circuity/voltage configurations/bias of De to arrive at the claimed limitations in order to provide varying degrees of leakage and drive currents to an assortment of n- and p-MOSFETs on the same die at a low cost (C7:L13—C9:L10, entire disclosure).
Regarding Claim 20, modified Matsuura teaches the device of claim 19, but is silent regarding wherein: the NMOS transistor (18) and the PMOS transistor (17) being in a forward back bias condition in response to a voltage higher than the first non-zero negative voltage being applied to the P-type doped well and a voltage lower than the first non-zero positive voltage being applied to the N-type doped well; and
the NMOS transistor and the PMOS transistor being in a reverse back bias condition in response to a voltage which is lower than the first non-zero negative voltage being applied to the P-type doped well and a voltage higher than the first non-zero positive voltage being applied to the N-type well (52 generates voltages, these limitations are drawn toward the manner of operation of the device, and without any additional structural or manufacturing limitations, this is implicitly satisfied by the structure, capability, and formation of the power supply of modified Matsuura. MPEP 2114).
Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the configurations of the disclosure of De to arrive at the claimed limitations in order to provide varying degrees of leakage and drive currents to an assortment of n- and p-MOSFETs on the same die (C8:L63—C9:L10).
Claims 4-5, 9, 13-14, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daisuke Matsuura et al. (US 20200007124 A1; hereinafter Matsuura) in view of Vivek De et al. (US 6593799 B2; hereinafter De) and Francois Andrieu (US 20180026036 A1; hereinafter Andrieu).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Matsuura teaches the device according to claim 1, wherein the NMOS transistor (18) includes a tensile strained channel region (28 is the channel region of the NMOS and is p-type doped; ¶0030), in the respective semiconductor film, and the PMOS transistor (17) includes a compressively strained channel region (23 is the channel region of the PMOS and is n-type doped; ¶0029), in the respective semiconductor film.
Matsuura is silent regarding wherein the p-type doped channel (28) of the NMOS transistor (18) is tensile strained, and the n-type doped channel (23) of the PMOS transistor (17) is compressively strained.
In the same field of endeavor, Andrieu teaches a similar NMOS and PMOS transistor configuration (Andrieu; Fig. 1) wherein NMOS transistors (11 to 14; ¶0024) that have a p-type doped channel region (¶0031) and PMOS transistors (21 to 24; ¶0027) that have a n-type doped channel region (¶0032), wherein the channel of the NMOS transistor is tensile strained (¶0034) and the channel of the PMOS transistor is compressively strained (¶0034).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the tensile strained NMOS transistor channel region and compressive strained PMOS transistor channel region of Andrieu in the device of Matsuura. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that utilizing the features of Andrieu in Matsuura improves the mobility of electrons and reduces the threshold voltage of the NMOS transistors while improving the mobility of holes and reducing the threshold voltage of the PMOS transistors (Andrieu; ¶0034).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Matsuura teaches the device according to claim 1, wherein the PMOS transistor (17) includes a channel region (23).
Matsuura is silent regarding the material of the channel region, wherein it is made of silicon-germanium alloy, in the respective semiconductor film, with a germanium concentration greater than 25% atomic percent.
In the same field of endeavor, Andrieu teaches a similar NMOS and PMOS transistor configuration (Andrieu; Fig. 1) wherein a PMOS transistor (any of 21 to 24; ¶0027) has a composition of SiGe with 25-35% germanium, and a reduction of the threshold voltage of the PMOS transistor is dependent on the percentage of germanium (Andrieu; ¶0082).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have SiGe in the PMOS channel (of Andrieu) with a Ge percentage above 25% in the device of Matsuura in order to optimize the result effective variable of threshold voltage of the transistor. MPEP 2144.05 II.
Regarding Claim 9, modified Matsuura teaches the device according to claim 1, including at least one CMOS circuit (Fig. 1; semiconductor device 10) provided with the NMOS transistor (18) and the PMOS transistor (17), which are configured to have nominal threshold voltages in the neutral back bias condition (see claim 1). Modified Matsuura is silent regarding the threshold voltages in at least one of the following intervals:
an interval of super low threshold voltages comprised between 0.15 V and 0.25 V in absolute values;
an interval of low threshold voltages between 0.2 V and 0.3 V in absolute values;
an interval of lower median threshold voltages between 0.25 V and 0.35 V in absolute values;
an interval of upper median threshold voltages between 0.3 V and 0.4 V in absolute values; or
an interval of high threshold voltages (HVT) between 0.35 V and 0.45 V in absolute values.
However, Matsuura discloses in ¶0034 (also in view of the disclosure of De) that the threshold voltages of the transistors are controlled by the applied substrate bias. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to optimize the threshold voltages of the transistors by adjusting the substrate bias (Matsuura; ¶0034). "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Furthermore, in the same field of endeavor, Andrieu teaches a similar device with a complimentary NMOS and PMOS transistor configuration (Andrieu; Fig. 1) wherein NMOS transistors (11 to 14; ¶0024) and PMOS transistors (21 to 24; ¶0027) can be variously configured to have threshold voltages (¶0030-¶0032, ¶0069) in the claimed voltage ranges (¶0003). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to optimize the threshold voltage ranges of Matsuura to be within the claimed range, in the manner of Andrieu (¶0003, ¶0030-¶0032, ¶0097-¶0098) in order to provide a device with fast access logic gates and low power consumption logic gates in the same integrated circuit (Andrieu; ¶0002).
Regarding Claim 13, modified Matsuura teaches the method according to claim 10, wherein: forming the NMOS transistor (18) comprises forming a tensile strained channel region (28 is the channel region of the NMOS and is p-type doped; ¶0030) in the respective semiconductor film; and forming the PMOS transistor (17) includes forming a compressively strained channel region (23 is the channel region of the PMOS and is n-type doped; ¶0029) in the respective semiconductor film.
Matsuura is silent regarding wherein the p-type doped channel (28) of the NMOS transistor (18) is tensile strained, and the n-type doped channel (23) of the PMOS transistor (17) is compressively strained.
In the same field of endeavor, Andrieu teaches a similar NMOS and PMOS transistor configuration (Andrieu; Fig. 1) wherein NMOS transistors (11 to 14; ¶0024) that have a p-type doped channel region (¶0031) and PMOS transistors (21 to 24; ¶0027) that have a n-type doped channel region (¶0032), wherein the channel of the NMOS transistor is tensile strained (¶0034) and the channel of the PMOS transistor is compressively strained (¶0034).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the tensile strained NMOS transistor channel region and compressive strained PMOS transistor channel region of Andrieu in the device of Matsuura. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that utilizing the features of Andrieu in Matsuura improves the mobility of electrons and reduces the threshold voltage of the NMOS transistors while improving the mobility of holes and reducing the threshold voltage of the PMOS transistors (Andrieu; ¶0034).
Regarding Claim 14, modified Matsuura teaches the method according to claim 10, wherein forming the PMOS transistor (17) includes forming a channel region (23).
Matsuura is silent regarding the material of the channel region, wherein it is made of silicon-germanium alloy in the respective semiconductor film, with a germanium concentration greater than 25% atomic percent.
In the same field of endeavor, Andrieu teaches a similar NMOS and PMOS transistor configuration (Andrieu; Fig. 1) wherein a PMOS transistor (any of 21 to 24; ¶0027) has a composition of SiGe with 25-35% germanium, and a reduction of the threshold voltage of the PMOS transistor is dependent on the percentage of germanium (Andrieu; ¶0082).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have SiGe in the PMOS channel (of Andrieu) with a Ge percentage above 25% in the device of Matsuura in order to optimize the result effective variable of threshold voltage of the transistor. MPEP 2144.05 II.
Regarding Claim 18, modified Matsuura teaches the method according to claim 10, further comprising forming at least one CMOS circuit (Fig. 1; semiconductor device 10) provided with the NMOS transistor (18) and the PMOS transistor (17), the method further comprising providing, by the at least one CMOS circuit, the NMOS and PMOS transistors with nominal threshold voltages in the neutral back bias condition (see claim 10). Matsuura is silent regarding the threshold voltages being in at least one of the following intervals:
an interval of super low threshold voltages between 0.15 V and 0.25 V in absolute values;
an interval of low threshold voltages comprised 0.2 V and 0.3 V in absolute values;
an interval of lower median threshold voltages between 0.25 V and 0.35 V in absolute values;
an interval of upper median threshold voltages between 0.3 V and 0.4 V in absolute values; or
an interval of threshold voltages between 0.35 V and 0.45 V in absolute values.
However, Matsuura discloses in ¶0034 (also in view of the disclosure of De) that the threshold voltages of the transistors are controlled by the applied substrate bias. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to optimize the threshold voltages of the transistors by adjusting the substrate bias (Matsuura; ¶0034). "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Furthermore, in the same field of endeavor, Andrieu teaches a similar device with a complimentary NMOS and PMOS transistor configuration (Andrieu; Fig. 1) wherein NMOS transistors (11 to 14; ¶0024) and PMOS transistors (21 to 24; ¶0027) can be variously configured to have threshold voltages (¶0030-¶0032, ¶0069) in the claimed voltages ranges (¶0003). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to optimize the threshold voltage ranges of Matsuura to be within the claimed range, in the manner of Andrieu (¶0003, ¶0030-¶0032, ¶0097-¶0098) in order to provide a device with fast access logic gates and low power consumption logic gates in the same integrated circuit (Andrieu; ¶0002).
Claims 6-7 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daisuke Matsuura et al. (US 20200007124 A1; hereinafter Matsuura) in view of Vivek De et al. (US 6593799 B2; hereinafter De) and Guillaume Ribes et al. (US 20180090389 A1; hereinafter Ribes).
Regarding Claim 6, modified Matsuura teaches the device according to claim 1, wherein the NMOS (18) and PMOS (17) transistors include a gate dielectric layer (29 and 24 respectively; ¶0030 and ¶0029) located between, respectively, a gate conductive region (30 and 25, respectively; ¶0030 and ¶0029) and the semiconductor film (26, 27, 28 and 21, 22, 23, respectively) (as shown in Fig. 1).
Matsuura is silent regarding the material of the gate dielectric layer, wherein the gate dielectric layer is comprising nitrogen to form a silicon oxynitride SiON layer.
In the same field of endeavor, Ribes teaches a similar device with NMOS and PMOS transistors (Ribes; Fig. 1) wherein a gate dielectric layer (11; ¶0027) comprises nitrogen and is SiON (Ribes; ¶0031).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the SiON dielectric layer of Ribes in the device of Matsuura because the substitution of a known equivalent (gate dielectric) for another known equivalent (for the same purpose as a gate dielectric) is prima facie case of obviousness. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). Furthermore, Ribes states in ¶0027 that the configuration contributes to the lowering of threshold voltages in the transistor.
Regarding Claim 7, modified Matsuura teaches the device according to claim 1, wherein the NMOS (18) and PMOS (17) transistors include a gate conductive region (30 and 25, respectively; ¶0030 and ¶0029).
Matsuura is silent regarding the material of the gate conductive regions including titanium nitride and a titanium nitride additive selected from lanthanum and aluminum, to modulate a work function of a gate of the NMOS transistor and a gate of the PMOS transistor to obtain the nominal threshold voltages in the neutral back bias condition.
In the same field of endeavor, Ribes teaches a similar device with NMOS and PMOS transistors (Ribes; Fig. 1) wherein gate conductive regions (15, 17, 19, 21; ¶0024) include titanium nitride and an additive lanthanum (Ribes; ¶0024) which leads to an optimization of the threshold voltage (Ribes; ¶0028).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the configuration of the gate conductive regions of Ribes in the device of Matsuura in order to optimize the threshold voltages of the transistors (Ribes; ¶0028). "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding Claim 15, modified Matsuura teaches the method according to claim 10, wherein forming the NMOS (18) and PMOS (17) transistors include forming a gate dielectric layer (29 and 24 respectively; ¶0030 and ¶0029) located between, respectively, a gate conductive region (30 and 25, respectively; ¶0030 and ¶0029) and the semiconductor film (26, 27, 28 and 21, 22, 23, respectively) (as shown in Fig. 1).
Matsuura is silent regarding the material of the gate dielectric layer, wherein the gate dielectric layer comprises nitrogen so as to form a silicon oxynitride SiON layer.
In the same field of endeavor, Ribes teaches a similar device with NMOS and PMOS transistors (Ribes; Fig. 1) wherein a gate dielectric layer (11; ¶0027) comprises nitrogen and is SiON (Ribes; ¶0031).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the SiON dielectric layer of Ribes in the device of Matsuura because the substitution of a known equivalent (gate dielectric) for another known equivalent (for the same purpose as a gate dielectric) is prima facie case of obviousness. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). Furthermore, Ribes states in ¶0027 that the configuration contributes to the lowering of threshold voltages in the transistor.
Regarding Claim 16, modified Matsuura teaches the method according to claim 10, wherein forming the NMOS (18) and PMOS (17) transistors include a gate conductive region (30 and 25, respectively; ¶0030 and ¶0029).
Matsuura is silent regarding the material of the gate conductive regions including titanium nitride and a titanium nitride additive selected from lanthanum and aluminum, so as to modulate a work function of a gate of the NMOS transistor and a gate of the PMOS transistor to obtain the nominal threshold voltages in the neutral back bias condition.
In the same field of endeavor, Ribes teaches a similar device with NMOS and PMOS transistors (Ribes; Fig. 1) wherein gate conductive regions (15, 17, 19, 21; ¶0024) include titanium nitride and an additive lanthanum (Ribes; ¶0024) which leads to an optimization of the threshold voltage (Ribes; ¶0028).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the configuration of the gate conductive regions of Ribes in the device of Matsuura in order to optimize the threshold voltages of the transistors (Ribes; ¶0028). "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN PRIDEMORE whose telephone number is (703)756-4640. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00am - 4:00pm 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, JULIO MALDONADO can be reached at (571) 272-1864. 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.
NATHAN PRIDEMORE
Examiner
Art Unit 2898
/NATHAN PRIDEMORE/Examiner, Art Unit 2898 /JULIO J MALDONADO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2898
Prosecution Insights