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 species I, claims 1-20, in the reply filed on May 12, 2026 is acknowledged.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on November 30, 2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
1) A-A’ line as shown in Fig. 2A does not correspond to Fig. 3 (i.e. Fig. 3 shows 482).
2) Fig. 2A: E-E’ line is missing.
3) Fig. 2: A square box in Q region is not labeling.
4) All plan view figures (except Fig. 1): “D1” should read “D3” and “D3” should read “D1”.
5) Figs. 2A, 52, 57, 60 and 64: “625” (3rd and 4th ones from left) should read “623”.
6) Figs. 5 and 55: “632” should read “632/636”.
6) Figs. 44 and 50: “552” should read “552/556”.
7) Figs. 4, 43, 46, 47, 49 and 54: “400” (next to “482”) should read “410”.
8) Fig. 64B: a length of 632 should extend from 636 to the left side of 636.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 11, 12 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. There appears to be no adequate description in the specification for the claim limitation of “a second region on a side in the first direction of the first region”, as recited in claims 11 and 19 (note: Fig.1 shows a second region on a side in the second direction of the first region); “the second division pattern is on each of opposite edge portions in the second direction of the third region of the substrate”, as recited in claim 12 (note: [0061] discloses that … gate electrode structures … on … the edge portion of third region III of the substrate 100 neighboring the first region I in the second direction D2, and Fig. 2A shows that 636 (second division pattern) each on an intermediate region, which next to an outer portion (edge portion) corresponding to gate electrode structure and between the center and the outer portion of the third region; therefore, the intermediate regions corresponding to “636” would not be considered as opposite edge portions of the third region of the substrate); “a memory channel structure extending in the first direction through each gate electrode structure of the plurality of gate electrode structures”, as recited in claim 1; and “a memory channel structure extending in the first direction through each gate electrode structure of the plurality of gate electrode structures on the CSP; a support structure extending in the first direction through each gate electrode structure of the plurality of gate electrode structures on the CSP; and a contact plug extending through each of the plurality of gate electrode structures”, as recited in claim 18 (note: Figs. 2A, 3 and 4 show that each 482, 520 and 525 extending in the first direction through each gate electrode of a corresponding one of the plurality of gate electrode structures).
Claims 1-12 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. There is no support in the specification for the claim limitations of “a memory channel structure extending in the first direction through each gate electrode structure of the plurality of gate electrode structures”, as recited in claim 1, “the substrate comprises a third region, a first region on each of opposite sides in the second direction of the third region, and a second region on a side in the first direction of the first region, wherein the first division pattern is on the first region and the second region of the substrate”, as recited in claim 11, and “a memory channel structure extending in the first direction through each gate electrode structure of the plurality of gate electrode structures on the CSP; a support structure extending in the first direction through each gate electrode structure of the plurality of gate electrode structures on the CSP; and a contact plug extending through each of the plurality of gate electrode structures”, as recited in claim 18 because the disclosure does not enable an artisan to have a substrate having a second region on a side in the first direction of the first region and then form the first division pattern on the first region and the second region of the substrate at the same time when “a first direction substantially perpendicular to an upper surface of the substrate”, as recited in claim 1; and to extend each memory channel structure, a support structure and a contact plug in the first direction through each gate electrode structure of the plurality of gate electrode structures when “the plurality of gate electrode structures being spaced apart from each other in a third direction substantially parallel to the upper surface of the substrate and crossing the second direction”, as recited in claims 1 and 18.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “substantially” in claims 1, 5, 13 and 18 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
The claimed limitation of “each gate electrode of the plurality of gate electrodes extending in a second direction”, as recited in claims 1, 13 and 18, is unclear as to which dimension of each gate electrode of the plurality of gate electrodes extending in a second direction applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “a first division pattern extending in the second direction”, as recited in claims 1 and 18, is unclear as to which dimension of a first division pattern extending in the second direction applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “a second division pattern extending in the third direction”, as recited in claims 1 and 18, is unclear as to which dimension of a second division pattern extending in the third direction applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “sidewalls of end portions … of the plurality of gate electrode structures”, as recited in claims 1 and 18, is unclear as to whether said limitation is in one-to-one, multiple-to-one or one-to-multiple relationship between “sidewall” and “end portion”, and between “end portion” and “gate electrode structure” applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “a memory channel structure extending in the first direction through each gate electrode structure of the plurality of gate electrode structures”, as recited in claims 1 and 18, is unclear as to how a memory channel structure can be extend through each gate electrode structure of the plurality of gate electrode structures when “the plurality of gate electrode structures being spaced apart from each other in a third direction substantially parallel to the upper surface of the substrate and crossing the second direction”, as recited in claims 1 and 18.
The claimed limitation of “a second maximum width … of other portions of the second division pattern”, as recited in claims 1 and 18, is unclear as to whether a second maximum width of each individual one or entirety of other portions of the second division pattern applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “a second width”, as recited in claim 2, is unclear as to whether said limitation is the same as or different from “a first maximum width” and/or “a second maximum width”, as recited in claim 1.
The claimed limitation of “the plurality of third division patterns extending partially through a corresponding gate electrode structure of the plurality of gate electrode structures” as recited in claims 3 and 20, is unclear as to the plurality of third division patterns extending in which direction and through a corresponding gate electrode structure from which element applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “a fourth maximum width”, as recited in claims 4 and 20, is unclear as to whether said limitation is the same as or different from “a second maximum width”, as recited in claims 1 and 18, respectively.
The claimed limitation of “other portions of the second division pattern”, as recited in claims 4 and 20, is unclear as to whether said limitation is the same as or different from “other portions of the second division pattern”, as recited in claims 1 and 18, respectively.
The claimed limitation of “a fourth maximum width … of other portions of the second division pattern”, as recited in claim 4, is unclear as to whether a second maximum width of each individual one or entirety of other portions of the second division pattern applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “that pattern”, as recited in claims 6, 9 and 16, is unclear as to which pattern applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “a fourth maximum width … of other portions of that pattern”, as recited in claims 6, 9 and 16, is unclear as to whether a fourth maximum width of each individual one or entirety of other portions of that pattern applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “a fourth division pattern extending through a lowermost gate electrode of the plurality of gate electrodes”, as recited in claim 7, is unclear as to a fourth division pattern extending in which direction and through a lowermost gate electrode of the plurality of gate electrodes from which element applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “a lowermost gate electrode of the plurality of gate electrodes”, as recited in claim 7, is unclear as to a lowermost gate electrode of the plurality of gate electrodes of which element applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “a plurality of fourth division patterns spaced apart from each other in the second direction on the substrate between the first division pattern and a pattern of the plurality of third division patterns neighboring in the third direction”, as recited in claim 7, is unclear as to which elements neighboring in the third direction applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “each pattern of the plurality of fourth division patterns extending partially through a corresponding gate electrode structure of the plurality of gate electrode structures” as recited in claim 8, is unclear as to the plurality of fourth division patterns extending in which direction and through a corresponding gate electrode structure from which element applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “a corresponding gate electrode structure of the plurality of gate electrode structures” as recited in claim 8, is unclear as whether said limitation is the same as or different from “a corresponding gate electrode structure of the plurality of gate electrode structures”, as recited in claim 3.
The claimed limitation of “a fifth division pattern extending through an uppermost gate electrode of the plurality of gate electrodes”, as recited in claim 10, is unclear as to a fifth division pattern extending in which direction and from which element through an uppermost gate electrode of the plurality of gate electrodes applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “an uppermost gate electrode of the plurality of gate electrodes”, as recited in claim 10, is unclear as to an uppermost gate electrode of the plurality of gate electrodes of which element applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “the substrate comprises a third region, a first region on each of opposite sides in the second direction of the third region, and a second region on a side in the first direction of the first region, wherein the first division pattern is on the first region and the second region of the substrate”, as recited in claims 11 and 19, is unclear as to how the first division pattern can be formed on the first region and the second region of the substrate at the same time when “a second region on a side in the first direction of the first region”, as recited in claim 11 and “a first direction substantially perpendicular to an upper surface of the substrate”, as recited in claim 1.
The claimed limitation of “each pattern of the plurality of first division patterns extending in the second direction”, as recited in claim 13, is unclear as to which dimension of each first division pattern extending in the second direction applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “each pattern of the plurality of second division patterns extending partially through the gate electrode structure” as recited in claim 13, is unclear as to each second division pattern extending in which direction and through the gate electrode structure from which element applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “a third division pattern extending through a lowermost gate electrode of the plurality of gate electrodes”, as recited in claim 14, is unclear as to a fourth division pattern extending in which direction and through a lowermost gate electrode of the plurality of gate electrodes from which element applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “each pattern of the plurality of third division patterns extending partially through the gate electrode structure” as recited in claim 15, is unclear as to each third division pattern extending in which direction and through the gate electrode structure from which element applicant refers.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “the end portion …of that pattern (each third division pattern)” in line 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The claimed limitation of “other portions of that pattern”, as recited in claim 16, is unclear as to whether said limitation is the same as or different from “other portions of that pattern”, as recited in claim 13.
The claimed limitation of “a fourth division pattern extending through an uppermost gate electrode of the plurality of gate electrodes”, as recited in claim 17, is unclear as to a fourth division pattern extending in which direction and from which element through an uppermost gate electrode of the plurality of gate electrodes applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “a support structure extending in the first direction through each gate electrode structure of the plurality of gate electrode structures”, as recited in claim 18, is unclear as to how a support structure can be extend through each gate electrode structure of the plurality of gate electrode structures when “the plurality of gate electrode structures being spaced apart from each other in a third direction substantially parallel to the upper surface of the substrate and crossing the second direction”, as recited in claim 18.
The claimed limitation of “a contact plug extending through each of the plurality of gate electrode structures”, as recited in claims 1 and 18, are unclear as to how a contact to be extend through each of the plurality of gate electrode structures when “the plurality of gate electrode structures being spaced apart from each other in a third direction substantially parallel to the upper surface of the substrate and crossing the second direction”, as recited in claim 18, and a contact plug extending from/in which direction through each gate electrode structure applicant refers.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record does not teach or suggest, singularly or in combination, the unique claim structure and arrangement of division patterns, as recited in claims 1, 13 and 18.
Claims 1-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ref's A-M are cited as being related to a semiconductor device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEIYA LI whose telephone number is (571)270-1572. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7AM-3PM.
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.
/MEIYA LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2811
Prosecution Insights