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 fig. 2, claims 1-10 and 16-18 in the reply filed on 12/17/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 19-20 are withdrawn from consideration since they are not read on fig. 2.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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.
Claims 1-4, 9-10, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by LEE et al [US 2023/0035899].
With respect to claim 1, LEE et al (figs. 1-4) disclose an integrated circuit device comprising:
a substrate (100, pp [0033]) that comprises an active region (ACT, pp [0036]) defined by a trench isolation;
a word line (WL, pp [0035]) that extends in a first horizontal direction inside the substrate across the active region;
a bit line (BL, pp [0037]-[0038]) that extends on the word line in a second horizontal direction orthogonal to the first horizontal direction;
a direct contact (DCC, pp [0040]) that electrically connects the bit line to the active region;
a pad (XP, pp [0040]) that is on the active region and has a horizontal width that is greater than that of the active region;
a buried contact (BC, pp [0085]) that contacts a sidewall of the pad; and
a conductive landing pad (LP, pp [0088]) that extends on the buried contact in a vertical direction and faces the bit line in the first horizontal direction.
With respect to claim 2, LEE et al (figs. 1-4) disclose wherein the sidewall of the pad (XP, pp [0040]) is a first sidewall and at least a portion of the first sidewall has a round shape, and a second sidewall of the pad opposing the first sidewall has a linear shape.
With respect to claim 3, LEE et al (figs. 1-4) disclose further comprising an insulating pattern (121, 127, pp [0077]) on opposing sidewalls of the direct contact, wherein the insulating pattern contacts the sidewall of the pad.
With respect to claim 4, LEE et al (figs. 1-4) disclose wherein a level of a lowermost surface of the buried contact (BC, pp [0085]) is higher than a level of a lowermost surface of the pad (XP, pp [0040]) in the vertical direction relative to the substrate, and the level of the lowermost surface of the buried contact is lower than a level of an uppermost surface of the pad in the vertical direction relative to the substrate.
With respect to claim 9, LEE et al (figs. 1-4) disclose wherein, in a plan view, the active region (ACT, pp [0036]) has a bar shape that extends in a diagonal direction with respect to the first horizontal direction and the second horizontal direction, the substrate further comprises a second active region (ACT, pp [0036]) defined by the trench isolation, a second pad (XP, pp [0040]) is on the second active region, and the pad is spaced apart from the second pad at an end of the bar shape.
With respect to claim 10, LEE et al (figs. 1-4) disclose wherein the round shape of at least the portion of the first sidewall of the pad (XP, pp [0040]) is concave.
With respect to claim 16, LEE et al (figs. 1-4) disclose an integrated circuit device comprising:
a substrate (100, pp [0033]) that comprises an active region (ACT, pp [0036]) defined by a trench isolation;
a pad (XP, pp [0040]) that is on the active region and has a horizontal width that is different from than that of the active region;
a word line (WL, pp [0035]) that extends in a first horizontal direction inside the substrate across the active region;
a bit line (BL, pp [0037]-[0038]) that extends on the word line in a second horizontal direction orthogonal to the first horizontal direction;
a direct contact (DCC, pp [0040]) that electrically connects the bit line to the active region;
a conductive landing pad (LP, pp [0088]) that faces the bit line in the first horizontal direction;
a capacitor structure (DSP, pp [0088]) on the bit line and electrically connected to the conductive landing pad; and
a buried contact (BC, pp [0085]) that contacts a sidewall of the pad such that the capacitor structure is electrically connected to the active region
With respect to claim 17, LEE et al (figs. 1-4) disclose wherein a horizontal width of the pad (XP, pp [0040]) is greater than a horizontal width of the active region (ACT, pp [0036]), the sidewall of the pad is a first sidewall and at least a portion of the first sidewall has a round shape, and a second sidewall of the pad opposing the first sidewall has a linear shape.
With respect to claim 18, LEE et al (figs. 1-4) disclose further comprising an insulating pattern (121, 127, pp [0077]) on opposing sidewalls of the direct contact, wherein the insulating pattern contacts the sidewall of the pad.
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE et al [US 2023/0035899] in view of Kim et al [US 2005/0017295].
LEE et al fail to disclose wherein the pad comprises a single-layer structure comprising doped polysilicon, and the buried contact comprises a material that is the same as a material of the pad. However, Kim et al (fig. 2) disclose that it well known in the art to have the pad (133, pp [0022]) comprises a single-layer structure comprising doped polysilicon, and the buried contact (160, pp [0031]) comprises a material that is the same as a material of the pad. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having skill in the art at the time the invention was made to select doped polysilicon as known materials, as taught by Kim et al., into the device of LEE et al for the buried contact and the pad. Moreover, selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co., Inc. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 7-8 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: The prior art of record fails to disclose wherein the level of the lowermost surface of the buried contact is higher than a level of an uppermost surface of the active region in the vertical direction relative to the substrate, and the level of the lowermost surface of the buried contact is lower than a level of an uppermost surface of the trench isolation in the vertical direction relative to the substrate (claim 5); wherein the pad comprises a lower pad comprising doped polysilicon and an upper pad comprising metal on the lower pad, and the buried contact directly contacts the upper pad and comprises a material that is the same as a material of the upper pad (claims 7-8).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOAI V PHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-1715. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30a.m-10:00p.m.
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, Drew Richards can be reached at 571-271-1736. 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.
/HOAI V PHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2892