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 January 12, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 4 and 5 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species. There is no support in the elected embodiment of Figs. 1-12 for the claim limitations of "forming the recess is performed prior to the forming the carbon-containing layer, and wherein the carbon-containing layer is further formed in the recess", as recited in claim 4, and this feature is found on unelected embodiment of Figs. 13-23.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on August 9, 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 as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “130” has been used to designate both “gate structure” and “dummy gate structure”. 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. 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 1-3 and 6-20 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 is no support in the original specification (in the prior-filed application #15/489,905, filed on April 18, 2017) for the claim limitations of "forming a carbon-containing layer on (over) the gate spacer layer", as recited in claims 1, 8 and 16 (note: the specification (i.e. [0018]-[0019]) discloses “a dopant-rich layer includes a carbon dopant”, which is a narrow terms/limitation when compared with the claimed limitation of “a carbon-containing layer); and “first carbon-containing diffusion barriers are formed in the gate spacer layer and second carbon-containing diffusion barriers are formed in the substrate, and the first carbon-containing diffusion barriers are vertically aligned with the second carbon-containing diffusion barriers”, as recited in claim 10; and “forming a first carbon-containing diffusion barrier in the gate spacer layer and forming a second carbon-containing diffusion barrier in the substrate, wherein the first carbon-containing diffusion barrier is vertically aligned with the second carbon-containing diffusion barrier”, as recited in claim 15.
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 7 and 16-19 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 claimed limitation of "carbon", as recited in claims 7, 17 and 18, is unclear as to whether said limitation is the same as or different from "carbon", as recited in claims 1 and 16, respectively.
The claimed limitation of "forming the first carbon-containing diffusion barrier and the second carbon-containing diffusion barrier", as recited in claim 16, is unclear as to whether said step is the same as or different from the steps of “forming a first carbon-containing diffusion barrier …” and/or “forming a second carbon-containing diffusion barrier …”, as recited in claim 16.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 8, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tsai et al. (9,508,556).
Tsai et al. show in Figs. 1, 2A-2G and related text a method, comprising:
forming a gate structure 104a on a substrate 100 (Fig. 2A);
forming a gate spacer layer 114 on a sidewall of the gate structure (Fig. 2A);
forming a carbon-containing layer 120 over the gate spacer layer (Fig. 2A);
removing (portions of) the carbon-containing layer (Fig. 2B);
removing a horizontal portion of the gate spacer layer to expose a surface of the substrate (Fig. 2B); and
forming an epitaxy structure 130a in the substrate (Fig. 2F).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 7 and 14, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. (9,508,556) in view of Chen et al. (2005/0164461).
As for claims 1, 2 and 7, Tsai et al. show in Figs. 1, 2A-2G and related text
a method, comprising:
forming a gate structure 104a on a substrate 100 (Fig. 2A);
forming a gate spacer layer 114 on a sidewall of the gate structure (Fig. 2A);
forming a carbon-containing layer 120 over the gate spacer layer (Fig. 2A);
forming a recess 128 in the substrate on one side of the gate spacer layer opposite to the gate structure (fig. 2E); and
forming an epitaxy feature 130a in the recess of the substrate (Fig. 2F).
Tsai et al. do not disclose diffusing carbon from the carbon-containing layer into a portion of the substrate below the gate spacer layer (claim 1); the carbon-containing layer is formed using a plasma-assisted process (claims 2); diffusing carbon from the carbon-containing layer into the portion of the substrate comprises performing an annealing process (claim 7).
As for claim 14, Tsai et al. disclosed substantially the entire claimed invention, as applied to claim 8 above, except the carbon-containing layer is formed using a plasma-assisted process.
Chen et al. teach in Figs. 1A-1D and related text:
As for claim 1, diffusing carbon 14 from the carbon-containing layer 25/13 is performed) into a portion of the substrate below the gate spacer layer 25 (Fig. 1D; [0017]-[0018]).
As for claims 2 and 14, the carbon-containing layer is formed using a plasma-assisted process ([0017]).
As for claim 7, diffusing carbon from the carbon-containing layer into the portion of the substrate comprises performing an annealing process ([0017]-[0018]).
Tsai et al. and Chen et al. are analogous art because they are directed to a method for forming a transistor and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Tsai et al. with the specified feature(s) of Chen et al. because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to diffuse carbon from the carbon-containing layer into a portion of the substrate below the gate spacer layer and perform by an annealing process, to form the carbon-containing layer using a plasma-assisted process, as taught by Chen et al., in Tsai et al.'s device, in order to reduce a leakage current in p-n junction and reduce damage to the substrate.
As for claim 3, the combined device shows removing (portions of) the carbon-containing layer (Tsai: Fig. 2B).
As for claim 6, the combined device shows etching the gate spacer layer to expose a top surface of the substrate prior to forming the recess in the substrate (Tsai: Fig. 2B).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-3, 8, 9, 12-15 and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 10-12, 14, 16 and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 11,776,911. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Claims 10-12, 14, 16 and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 11,776,911 teach substantially the limitations in Claims 1-3, 8, 9, 12-15 and 20 of the instant application.
Regarding the limitations which are not identical, claims 1-3, 8, 9, 12-15 and 20 of the instant application are obvious over (or obvious variants of) the claims 10-12, 14, 16 and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 11,776,911 by omitting limitations of “etching the gate spacer layer to form a gate spacer on the sidewall of the gate structure”, as recited in claim 10 (when compared with claim 1); “prior to etching the gate spacer layer”, as recited in claim 12 (when compared with claim 3); “performing an annealing process, such that a first carbon-containing diffusion barrier is formed in the gate spacer layer and a second carbon-containing diffusion barrier is formed in the substrate, and the first carbon-containing diffusion barrier is vertically aligned with the second carbon-containing diffusion barrier; … after performing the annealing process; … to form a gate spacer on the sidewall of the gate structure”, as recited in claim 14 (when compared with claim 8); “forming a carbon-containing layer over the gate spacer layer; performing an anneal process, …; removing the carbon-containing layer after performing the annealing process; removing a horizontal portion of the gate spacer layer to form a gate spacer on the sidewall of the gate structure, wherein a surface of the substrate is exposed by the gate spacer (when compared with claim 15) of U.S. Patent No. 11,776,911.
Furthermore, claim 14 of U.S. Patent No. 11,776,911 does not explicitly state that “the gate structure is formed over a channel region of the substrate”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the gate structure over a channel region of the substrate, as since it was known in the art that the gate of a transistor is formed over the channel region of the transistor, of which official notice is taken.
Conclusion
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