Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/332,785

SELF ALIGNED BACKSIDE CONTACT

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Jun 12, 2023
Examiner
LEE, WOO KYUNG
Art Unit
2815
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
International Business Machines Corporation
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
132 granted / 166 resolved
+11.5% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
204
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
47.6%
+7.6% vs TC avg
§102
24.2%
-15.8% vs TC avg
§112
28.1%
-11.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 166 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . This Office Action (Second Non-Final Rejection) is in response to Amendment filed on December 12, 2025. Claim Objections Claims 2, 9 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claims 2, 9 and 15, “geranium” should be amended with “germanium”. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 1-2, 4-5, 8-9, 11-12, 14-15, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Huang et al. (US 2022/0352326, hereinafter Huang). Regarding claim 1, Huang discloses for a semiconductor structure comprising that first source drain regions (drain feature 232D, Fig. 38) and second source drain regions (source feature 232S, Fig. 38) arranged above a backside dielectric layer (backside dielectric layer 260, Fig. 38); and a buffer layer (silicide layer 266, Fig. 38, labeled in Fig. 25) physically separating at least one of the second source drain regions (at least one of 232S, Fig. 38) from the backside dielectric layer (260, Fig. 38), because Applicants do not specifically claim what a buffer layer is made of and/or what material’s composition a buffer layer has, the silicide layer 266 is disposed directly on the source features 232S and it physically separates the source feature 232S from the backside dielectric layer 260 (Fig. 25, 38), therefore, the silicide layer 266 can correspond to the buffer layer in the claimed invention, wherein at least one of the first source drain regions (232D, Fig. 38) is in direct contact with the backside dielectric layer (260, Fig. 38). Regarding claim 2, Huang further discloses for the semiconductor structure according to claim 1 that the first source drain regions (232D, Fig. 38) are made from silicon geranium based epitaxy, because “exemplary p-type source/drain features may include germanium, gallium-doped silicon germanium, boron-doped silicon germanium, or other suitable material and may be in-situ doped during the epitaxial process by introducing a p-type dopant, such as boron or gallium, or ex-situ doped using a junction implant process” (emphasis added, [0028]); and the second source drain regions (232S, Fig. 38) are made from silicon based epitaxy, because “exemplary n-type source/drain features may include silicon, phosphorus-doped silicon, arsenic-doped silicon, antimony-doped silicon, or other suitable material and may be in-situ doped during the epitaxial process by introducing an n-type dopant, such as phosphorus, arsenic, or antimony, or ex-situ doped using a junction implant process” (emphasis added, [0028]). Regarding claim 4, Huang further discloses for the semiconductor structure according to claim 1 that the backside dielectric layer (260, Fig. 38) is made from a different dielectric material than shallow trench isolation regions (isolation structure 204 or shallow isolation structure (STI) feature 204, Fig. 2, [0022]), because Huang discloses that “the dielectric layer 260 may have a composition similar to that of the bottom ILD layer 236” ([0041]) and “the bottom ILD layer 236 may include materials such as tetraethylorthosilicate (TEOS) oxide, un-doped silicate glass, or doped silicon oxide such as borophosphosilicate glass (BPSG), fused silica glass (FSG), phosphosilicate glass (PSG), boron doped silicon glass (BSG), and/or other suitable dielectric materials” ([0029]). Huang further discloses that “the isolation structure 204 may include silicon oxide, silicon oxynitride, fluorine-doped silicate glass (FSG), a low-k dielectric, combinations thereof, and/or other suitable materials” ([0022]), therefore, the backside dielectric 260 and the isolation structure 204 by Huang can be selected from different dielectric materials, as an example, tetraethylorthosilicate (TEOS) oxide for the backside dielectric 260 and silicon oxynitride for the isolation structure 204 can be selected. Regarding claim 5, Huang further discloses for the semiconductor structure according to claim 1 that a width of the buffer layer (266, Fig. 38 and labeled in Fig. 25) is substantially equal to a width of at least one of the second source drain regions (232S, Fig. 38), because as shown in Fig. 38 of Huang, a width of the source feature 232S is substantially equal to a width the silicide layer 266 in a cross-section. Regarding claim 8, Huang further discloses for a semiconductor structure comprising that first source drain regions (drain feature 232D, Fig. 38) and second source drain regions (source feature 232S, Fig. 38) arranged above a backside dielectric layer (backside dielectric layer 260, Fig. 38); a buffer layer (silicide layer 266, Fig. 38, labeled in Fig. 25) physically separating at least one of the second source drain regions (232S, Fig. 38) from the backside dielectric layer (260, Fig. 38), wherein at least one of the first source drain regions (232D, Fig. 38) is in direct contact with the backside dielectric layer (260, Fig. 38); and a bottom dielectric isolation layer (bottom gate dielectric layer 212’, Fig. 38) physically separating nanosheet stacks (channel layers 208, Fig. 38) from the backside dielectric layer (260, Fig. 38), because Applicants do not specifically claim what a bottom dielectric isolation layer is made of, where it is positioned, and/or what it looks like, the bottom gate dielectric layer 212’ by Huang physically separates a stack of channel layers 208 from the backside dielectric 160 (Fig. 38). Regarding claim 9, Huang further discloses for the semiconductor structure according to claim 8 that the first source drain regions are made from silicon geranium based epitaxy; and the second source drain regions are made from silicon based epitaxy, as the same reasons discussed in claim 2 above. Regarding claim 11, Huang further discloses for the semiconductor structure according to claim 8 that the backside dielectric layer is made from a different dielectric material than shallow trench isolation regions, as the same reasons discussed in claim 4 above. Regarding claim 12, Huang further discloses for the semiconductor structure according to claim 8 that a width of the buffer layer is substantially equal to a width of at least one of the second source drain regions, as the same reasons discussed in claim 5 above. Regarding claim 14, Huang further discloses for a semiconductor structure comprising that first source drain regions (drain feature 232D, Fig. 38) between a first set of adjacent nanosheet channels (adjacent stack of channel layers 208 in the first device region 400A, Fig. 38); second source drain regions (source feature 232S, Fig. 38) between a second set of adjacent nanosheet channels (adjacent stack of channel layers 208 in the second device region 400B, Fig. 38); a backside dielectric layer (backside dielectric 260, Fig. 38) arranged below all of the first source drain regions (below all of 232D, Fig. 38) and the second source drain regions (below all of 232S, Fig. 38); and a buffer layer (silicide layer 266, Fig. 38, labeled in Fig. 25) physically separating at least one of the second source drain regions (232S, Fig. 38) from the backside dielectric layer (260, Fig. 38), wherein at least one of the first source drain regions (232D, Fig. 38) is in direct contact with the backside dielectric layer (260, Fig. 38). Regarding claim 15, Huang further discloses for the semiconductor structure according to claim 14 that the first source drain regions are made from silicon geranium based epitaxy; and the second source drain regions are made from silicon based epitaxy, as the same reasons discussed in claim 2 above. Regarding claim 17, Huang further discloses for the semiconductor structure according to claim 14 that the backside dielectric layer is made from a different dielectric material than shallow trench isolation regions, as the same reasons discussed in claim 4 above. Regarding claim 18, Huang further discloses for the semiconductor structure according to claim 14 that a width of the buffer layer is substantially equal to a width of at least one of the second source drain regions, as the same reasons discussed in claim 5 above. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3, 6-7, 10, 13, 16 and 19-20 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) 1, 8 and 14 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 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WOO K LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-5816. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm. 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, JOSHUA BENITEZ can be reached at 571-270-1435. 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. /WOO K LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2815
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 12, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Dec 12, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 17, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 17, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604492
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE INCLUDING AN ACTIVE PATTERN
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598874
DISPLAY PANEL AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING THE SAME, AND DISPLAY APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597468
THREE-DIMENSIONAL MEMORY DEVICES AND FABRICATING METHODS THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598753
VERTICAL SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND METHOD FOR FABRICATING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593576
DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+18.4%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 166 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