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 in the reply filed on 2/3/2026 is acknowledged.
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.
Claims 1-2, 8, 21, 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pan et al (US Publication No. 2021/0272856).
Regarding claim 1, Pan discloses a method for making a semiconductor device, comprising: forming a structure upon a substrate comprising a first fin Fig 4, 402, a second fin Fig 4, 402, and a hybrid fin Fig 7, 706” and Fig 14, 706”, located between the first fin and the second fin Fig 7; and etching the hybrid fin Fig 22A, such that the hybrid fin includes a base and a horn extending from the base on a side proximal to the second fin Fig 23A.
Regarding claim 2, Pan discloses wherein the horn of the hybrid fin has a height of about 5 to about 10 nanometers ¶0031.
Regarding claim 8, Pan discloses wherein the first fin and the second fin are formed from the substrate; and the hybrid fin is formed from a dielectric material with a dielectric constant greater than 3.9 ¶0024 and 0031.
Regarding claim 21, Pan discloses a method for making a semiconductor device, comprising: shaping a substrate to form at least one central fin and two outer fins Fig 4, with trenches being present between each pair of adjacent fins Fig 5; forming a dielectric layer Fig 7, 602 upon the at least one central fin Fig 7, the two outer fins, and the substrate Fig 7-8;depositing a secondary dielectric material Fig 18A, 702 into the trenches to form two hybrid fins between the at least one central fin and the two outer fins Fig 17A-17B, 18A-18B;etching away portions of the dielectric layer between the at least one central fin, the two outer fins, and the two hybrid fins Fig 17A-17B, 18A-18B, 20A-21B;etching the at least one central fin and the two hybrid fins, such that each hybrid fin includes a base and a horn extending upwards from the base on a side proximal to an outer fin Fig 22A-22B.
Regarding claim 23, Pan discloses wherein two central fins are formed Fig 19A-19B.
Regarding claim 24, Pan discloses wherein a third hybrid fin is formed between the two central fins, and the third hybrid fin does not have a horn Fig 22A-22B.
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 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pan et al (US Publication No. 2021/0272856).
Regarding claim 3, Pan discloses partial height of the hybrid fin ¶0031 but is silent on the range of the total height for the hybrid fin.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the hybrid fin’s height to about 20 to about 30 nanometers, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (1955).
Regarding claim 4, Pan discloses all the limitations but silent on the hybrid fin having a width of about 3 to about 8 nanometers. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the hybrid fins width, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (1955).
Regarding claim 5, Pan discloses all the limitations but silent on the hybrid fin’s base having a width of about 10 to about 20 nanometers. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the hybrid fins width, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (1955).
Regarding claim 6, Pan discloses a lower height of the second fin Fig 22A-22B, 302A to be similar to a height of the hybrid fin Fig 22A-22B. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify the height of the second fin and the hybrid fin to be the same, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1995).
Claims 7, 9-11, 13-14, 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pan et al (US Publication No. 2021/0272856) in view of Ching et al (US Publication No. 2019/0067444).
Regarding claim 7, Pan discloses all the limitations except for the concurrently etching the hybrid fin and the first fin.
Whereas Ching discloses wherein the first fin is concurrently etched with the hybrid fin Fig 15A-16A.
Pan and Ching are analogous art because they are directed to semiconductor devices having metal gates and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Pan because they are from the same field of endeavor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Pan and incorporate the teachings of Ching to provide device interconnect.
Regarding claim 9, Ching discloses forming an n-type epitaxial feature on the first fin; forming a p-type epitaxial feature on the second fin; and depositing a gap fill material Fig 12A-16A,138 to fill gaps between the hybrid fin and the second fin ¶0056-0061.
Regarding claim 10, Ching in view of Pan discloses wherein the horn of the hybrid fin extends at most to about half the height of the p-type epitaxial feature Fig 12A-16A.
Regarding claim 11, Ching in view of Pan discloses all the limitations but silent on the ratio. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a ratio of a height of the p-type epitaxial feature to a height of the horn of the hybrid fin, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F. 2d 272, 205 USPQ (CCPA 1980)
Regarding claim 13, Ching in view of Pan discloses depositing a capping dielectric layer Fig 15B,134/140 over the n-type epitaxial feature and the p-type epitaxial feature; and forming metal contacts to the n-type epitaxial feature and the p-type epitaxial feature that pass through the capping dielectric layer Fig 16B.
Regarding claim 14, Ching in view of Pan discloses wherein each metal contact comprises an electrical contact resistance reduction layer and a metal plug ¶0083.
Regarding claim 22, Ching discloses forming forming an n-type epitaxial feature on the at least one central fin; and forming a p-type epitaxial feature on each of the two outer fins¶0056-0061.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pan et al (US Publication No. 2021/0272856) in view of Ching et al (US Publication No. 2019/0067444) and in further view of Lin et al (US Publication No. 2021/0098473).
Regarding claim 12, Pan discloses all the limitations but silent on the size of the epitaxial feature. Whereas Lin discloses wherein a volume of the n-type epitaxial feature is greater than a volume of the p-type epitaxial feature Fig 10A-10B ¶0054-0055, 0063. Pan and Lin are analogous art because they are directed to semiconductor devices having metal gates and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Pam because they are from the same field of endeavor. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the size of the epitaxial feature since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1995).
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ching et al (US Publication No. 2019/0067444) in view of Pan et al (US Publication No. 2021/0272856).
Regarding claim 19, Ching discloses a method for making a semiconductor device, comprising: forming a structure upon a substrate comprising at least one central fin Fig 4B, 106 located between two hybrid fins Fig 4B, 116 and two outer fins located on opposite sides of the two hybrid fins from the at least one central fin Fig 4B;etching the at least two hybrid fins Fig 8A, forming an n-type epitaxial feature on the at least one central fin¶0056-0061;forming a p-type epitaxial feature on each of the two outer fins¶0056-0061;depositing a gap fill material Fig 12A-16A,138 to fill gaps between each hybrid fin and the second fin proximate each hybrid fin; and forming metal contacts to the n-type epitaxial features and the p-type epitaxial features Fig 16B. Ching discloses all the limitations but silent on the shape and arrangement of the hybrid fin. Whereas Pan discloses forming a structure upon a substrate comprising at least one central fin Fig 14A located between two hybrid fins Fig 14A, 706’ and 706” and two outer fins located on opposite sides of the two hybrid fins from the at least one central fin Fig 14A;etching the at least one central fin and the two hybrid fins Fig 18A, such that each hybrid fin includes a base and a horn extending from the base on a side proximal to an outer fin Fig 21A. Ching and Pan are analogous art because they are directed to semiconductor devices having metal gates and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Ching because they are from the same field of endeavor. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the shape of the hybrid fin since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In reDailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Regarding claim 20, Pan discloses wherein the structure has two central fins Fig 16A.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE A ENAD whose telephone number is (571)270-7891. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:30 am -4:30 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, Lynne Gurley can be reached at 571 272 1670. 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.
/CHRISTINE A ENAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2811