DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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
Applicant’s election of Species 1, reading on, e.g. FIG. 15 (claims 1-20) without traverse in the reply filed on February 9, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims #17-20 are additionally withdrawn by the Examiner for reading on non-elected species 2, e.g. FIG. 33, and species 3, e.g. FIG. 45. Only FIG. 33 and FIG. 45 disclose a channel 915 on a sidewall of the gate insulation pattern.
IDS
The IDS document(s) filed on September 13, 2023 and August 22, 2024 and January 9, 2025 and October 1, 2025 have been considered. Copies of the PTO-1449 documents are herewith enclosed with this office action.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. § 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 2, 5, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant, regards as the invention.
As to claim 2, there is a lack of antecedent basis for “the dielectric pattern contacting the interface structure” (emphasis added). Parent claim 1 merely recites an interface structure on the dielectric pattern, wherein “on” does not necessarily require contact, as proximity is sufficient to meet the definition.
As to claim 5, there is a lack of antecedent basis for “the second metal”. The Examiner assumes “the second metal oxide”.
As to claim 15, there is a lack of antecedent basis for “the first interface pattern contacting the dielectric pattern” (emphasis added). Parent claim 11 merely recites a first interface structure on the dielectric pattern, wherein “on” does not necessarily require contact, as proximity is sufficient to meet the definition.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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 of this title, 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over An et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0130835 A1), as cited in the IDS and hereafter “An”.
As to claim 1, An teaches:
A lower electrode 200. See An, FIG. 1.
A dielectric pattern 250 on the lower electrode, wherein the dielectric pattern includes an oxide of a metal having 4 valence electrons. An teaches the dielectric pattern comprises hafnium oxide or zirconium oxide, where hafnium and zirconium each have four valence electrons. Id. at ¶ [0048].
An interface structure (140+150) on the dielectric pattern, wherein the interface structure includes a first interface pattern 140 including a first oxide doped with nitrogen, and a second interface pattern 150 including a second oxide. An teaches the first oxide doped with nitrogen may include SiN, SiCN, SiBN, SiON, or SiOCN. Id. at ¶ [0044]. An teaches the second oxide may include SiCO or SiO. Id.
An upper electrode 260 on the interface structure.
However, An does not teach the first oxide being a first metal oxide or the second oxide being a second metal oxide.
On the other hand, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute a first metal oxide doped with nitrogen for the first oxide doped with nitrogen and a second metal oxide for the second oxide, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Furthermore, as a matter of design choice, there are a limited number of materials that can provide the first and second interface patterns. Thus, the use of metal oxide doped with nitrogen over an oxide doped with nitrogen is merely a matter of routine skill in the choosing of a material based on its common properties and its suitability for the intended use, and as such, the invention is “the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense.” KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 421 (2007). “Granting patent protection to advances that would occur in the ordinary course without real innovation retards progress.” Id. at 419. Nothing in Applicant’s disclosure establishes that a first metal oxide doped with nitrogen or a second metal oxide presents a novel or unexpected result, thus selection is based upon suitability for the intended use is a design choice consideration within the skill of the art.
As to claim 3, An teaches hafnium oxide or zirconium oxide. See An, ¶ [0048].
As to claim 4, An does not teach the first metal oxide doped with nitrogen includes at least one of titanium and niobium.
On the other hand, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use at least one of titanium and niobium for the first metal oxide, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
As to claim 5, An does not teach the second metal oxide includes at least one of titanium, niobium, tantalum, vanadium, and tin.
On the other hand, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use at least one of titanium, niobium, tantalum, vanadium, and tin for the second metal oxide, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. Id.
As to claim 6, An does not teach the first pattern has a dielectric constant that ranges from between 5 to about 30.
On the other hand, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use a first pattern with a dielectric constant between 5 and about 30, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. Id.
Claims Allowable If Rewritten in Independent Form
Claims 2, 7-10 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.
Claim 2 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), set forth in this Office action. Furthermore, An does not teach or suggest the incorporation of nitrogen with hafnium or zirconium. See An, ¶¶ [0048]-[0062].
As to claim 7, An does not teach the relative thicknesses.
As to claim 9, An teaches a support layer 130 but the dielectric pattern 250 only contacts an upper surface of the support layer and not a lower surface of the support layer.
Indication of Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: claims 11-14, 16 are indicated as being allowable because prior art fails to teach “a dielectric pattern on the lower electrode and having a first thickness, wherein the dielectric pattern includes an oxide of a first metal…a second interface pattern on the first interface pattern and having a third thickness less than the first thickness, the second interface pattern including an oxide of the second metal and the third metal” (claim 11).
As to claim 11, An does not teach the claimed first, second, and third thicknesses nor the material requirements.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUBERR CHI whose telephone number is (571)270-3955. The examiner can normally be reached 10am to 6pm.
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, Sue Purvis can be reached on (571) 272-1236. 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.
/SUBERR L CHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893