Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/345,130

SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICES

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Jun 30, 2023
Examiner
NIX, NORA TAYLOR
Art Unit
2891
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
67 granted / 76 resolved
+20.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
94
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
58.2%
+18.2% vs TC avg
§102
27.8%
-12.2% vs TC avg
§112
13.6%
-26.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 76 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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 11-15 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. 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claims 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Peng et al. (US 20210280716 A1; hereinafter Peng). Regarding claim 11, FIG. 1A-1C of Peng teach a semiconductor device (102B ¶ [0023]), comprising: channels (122) spaced apart from each other on a substrate (106) in a vertical direction substantially perpendicular to an upper surface of the substrate (Z direction ¶ [0026]); a gate structure (112B) on the substrate (106 ¶ [0025]), the gate structure (112B) bordering lower and upper surfaces and a first sidewall of at least a portion of each of the channels (surfaces of 122 ¶ [0026]); a source/drain layer (110B) on a portion of the substrate (106) adjacent to the gate structure (112B), the source/drain layer (110B) contacting second sidewalls of the channels (sidewalls of 112B ¶ [0025]-[0026]); and an oxide pattern (uppermost 113B, hereinafter ‘113B’ ¶ [0025],[0043]) contacting an upper surface of an end portion of an uppermost one of the channels (upper surface of an end portion of uppermost instance of 122), an upper surface of the oxide pattern (upper surface of 113B) being lower than an upper surface of the source/drain layer (upper surface of 110B), and the oxide pattern (113B) including silicon oxynitride (¶ [0043]). Regarding claim 12, Peng teaches the semiconductor device as claimed in claim 11, and FIGS. 1A-1C of Peng further teach further comprising a gate spacer (114B ¶ [0025]) on an upper sidewall of the gate structure (upper sidewall of 112B), wherein the oxide pattern (113B) is interposed between the uppermost one of the channels (uppermost 122) and the gate spacer (114B, see FIG. 1C). Regarding claim 13, Peng teaches the semiconductor device as claimed in claim 11, and FIGD. 1A-1C of Peng teach wherein the oxide pattern (113B) does not overlap the gate structure (112B) in the vertical direction (Z direction). Regarding claim 14, Peng teaches the semiconductor device as claimed in claim 13, and FIGS. 1A-1C of Peng teach wherein a sidewall of the oxide pattern (113B) contacts the gate structure (112B). Regarding claim 15, Peng teaches the semiconductor device as claimed in claim 11, and FIG. 1C of Peng according to another interpretation further teaches wherein a portion of the oxide pattern (113B) overlaps the gate structure (112B, 114B) in the vertical direction (Z direction). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-10 and 16-20 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Claim 1 recites a semiconductor device, comprising: channels spaced apart from each other on a substrate in a vertical direction substantially perpendicular to an upper surface of the substrate; a gate structure on the substrate, the gate structure bordering lower and upper surfaces and a first sidewall of at least a portion of each of the channels; and a source/drain layer on a portion of the substrate adjacent to the gate structure, the source/drain layer contacting second sidewalls of the channels, wherein a nitrogen-containing portion is formed at an upper portion of an uppermost one of the channels, the nitrogen-containing portion being doped with nitrogen, and wherein the nitrogen-containing portion is positioned between portions of the gate structure disposed on the upper portion of the uppermost one of the channels. FIG. 1 of Chen et al. (US 20210367032 A1; hereinafter Chen) teaches a semiconductor device (e.g. FIG. 20), comprising: channels (135) spaced apart from each other on a substrate (120) in a vertical direction substantially perpendicular to an upper surface of the substrate (Z direction); a gate structure (145) on the substrate (120), the gate structure (145) bordering lower and upper surfaces and a first sidewall of at least a portion of each of the channels (surfaces of 135); and a source/drain layer (110) on a portion of the substrate (120) adjacent to the gate structure (145), the source/drain layer (110) contacting second sidewalls of the channels (sidewalls of 135), wherein a nitrogen-containing portion (portion of an uppermost instance of 150, hereinafter ‘150’) is formed at an upper portion of an uppermost one of the channels (upper portion of uppermost instance of 135), and wherein the nitrogen-containing portion (150) is positioned between portions of the gate structure (portions of 145) disposed on the upper portion of the uppermost one of the channels (upper portion of uppermost 135). However, the prior art fails to teach or reasonably suggest “the nitrogen-containing portion being doped with nitrogen” together with all the limitations of claim 1 as claimed. Claims 1-10 are allowable insofar as they depend upon and require all the limitations of claim 1. Claim 16 recites a semiconductor device, comprising: an active pattern on a substrate; channels spaced apart from each other on the active pattern in a vertical direction substantially perpendicular to an upper surface of the substrate; a gate structure on the substrate, the gate structure bordering lower and upper surfaces and a first sidewall of at least a portion of each of the channels; a source/drain layer on a portion of the substrate adjacent to the gate structure, the source/drain layer contacting second sidewalls of the channels; a gate spacer on an upper sidewall of the gate structure; a nitrogen-containing portion along an upper portion of an uppermost one of the channels; and an oxide pattern between an upper surface of each of opposite end portions of the uppermost one of the channels and a lower surface of the gate spacer, wherein a portion of the gate structure is positioned along the upper surface and between the nitrogen-containing portion and the oxide pattern. FIGS. 2A-D of Cheng et al. (US 20210320191 A1; hereinafter Cheng) teach a semiconductor device (e.g. FIG. 2A), comprising: an active pattern (11) on a substrate (10 ¶ [0048]); channels (20) spaced apart from each other on the active pattern (11) in a vertical direction substantially perpendicular to an upper surface of the substrate (Z direction ¶ [0048]); a gate structure (108, 106) on the substrate (10), the gate structure (108, 106) bordering lower and upper surfaces and a first sidewall of at least a portion of each of the channels (lower and upper surfaces of 20 in Z direction, sidewalls of 20 in Y direction, see FIG. 2B ¶ [0049]); a source/drain layer (80, 85) on a portion of the substrate (10) adjacent to the gate structure (108, 106 ¶ [0050]), the source/drain layer (80, 85) contacting second sidewalls of the channels (sidewalls of 20 in X direction); a gate spacer (55) on an upper sidewall of the gate structure (55 on upper sidewall of 108, 106); a nitrogen-containing portion (104 ¶ [0042], [0091]) at an upper portion of an uppermost one of the channels (formed above uppermost channel 20); and an oxide pattern (102) between an upper surface of each of opposite end portions of the uppermost one of the channels (opposite ends of upper surface of uppermost 20) and a lower surface of the gate spacer (lower surface of 55 ¶ [0091]). However, the prior art fails to teach or reasonably suggest “wherein a portion of the gate structure is positioned along the upper surface and between the nitrogen-containing portion and the oxide pattern” together with all the limitations of claim 16 as claimed. Claims 17-20 are allowable insofar as they depend upon and require all the limitations of claim 16. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nora T Nix whose telephone number is (571)270-1972. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm ET. 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, Matthew Landau can be reached at (571) 272-1731. 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. /Nora T. Nix/Assistant Examiner, Art Unit 2891 /MATTHEW C LANDAU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2891
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 30, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Oct 29, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Oct 29, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 29, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 18, 2026
Final Rejection — §102
Mar 23, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 23, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12575283
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12575208
IMAGE SENSOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12557618
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12495561
SCHOTTKY DIODE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Patent 12490567
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 02, 2025
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+10.7%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 76 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