DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office Action is in response to the communications dated 08/13/2026.
Claims 1-16, and 21-24 are pending in this application.
Claims 17-20 have been cancelled.
Remarks
2. Applicant's arguments have been fully considered, but are moot in view of a new ground of rejection. See details below.
Drawings
3. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the claimed limitation “a semiconductor layer disposed on the high-Kappa dielectric layer” recited in claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 1-9 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.
Claim 1 recite limitation “a semiconductor layer disposed on the high-Kappa dielectric layer”. Such limitation is not supported by either the specification or the drawings.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
7. Claims 10-12, 16, 21, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Galatage et al. (US 2023/0402507)
Regarding claim 10, Galatage discloses a semiconductor structure, comprising:
a first bottom source/drain feature 105c and a second bottom source/drain feature 105d disposed over a substrate 144 (see Fig. 1A);
a plurality of bottom channel members 103b (all or just the bottom three nanoribbon layers 103b – the lower layers 103b) extending between and in contact with the first bottom source/drain feature 105c and the second bottom source/drain feature 105d;
a first bonding layer 120 (lower layer 120) over the plurality of bottom channel members 103b;
a second bonding layer 120 (upper layer 120) disposed directly on the first bonding layer 120;
a first top source/drain feature 105a disposed directly over the first bottom source/drain feature 105c;
a second top source/drain feature 105b disposed directly over the second bottom source/drain feature 105d; and
a plurality of top channel members 103a (all or just the top three nanoribbon layers 103a - the upper layers 103a) disposed over the second bonding layer 120 and extending between and in contact with the first top source/drain feature 105a and the second top source/drain feature 105b,
wherein there is an observable interface between the first bonding layer 120 and the second bonding layer 120,
wherein the first bonding layer 120 and the second bonding layer 120 comprise metal nitride, metal oxide, silicon carbide, graphene, or diamond (see para. 0063).
Regarding claim 11, Galatage discloses the semiconductor structure of claim 10, further comprising:
a first semiconductor layer 103b (the topmost layer 103b) disposed between the plurality of bottom channel members (the lower layers 103b) and the first bonding layer 120; and
a second semiconductor layer 103a (the lowermost layer 103a) disposed between the plurality of top channel members (the upper layers 103a) and the second bonding layer 120,
wherein the first semiconductor layer 103b interfaces the first bonding layer 120,
wherein the second semiconductor layer 103a interfaces the second bonding layer 120
wherein the metal nitride comprises aluminum nitride or boron nitride (note: these are well known high-k dielectric materials; see para. 0063).
Regarding claim 12, Galatage discloses the semiconductor structure of claim 10, wherein the metal nitride comprises aluminum nitride or boron nitride (note: these are well known high-k dielectric materials; see para. 0063).,
wherein the metal oxide comprises yttrium oxide, yttrium aluminum garnet, aluminum oxide, or beryllium oxide. See para. 0063.
Regarding claim 16, Galatage discloses the semiconductor structure of claim 10, wherein the first bottom source/drain feature 103b and the second bottom source/drain feature 103b comprise silicon germanium,
wherein the first top source/drain feature 103a and the second top source/drain feature 103a comprise silicon and phosphorus.
See para. 0064.
Regarding claim 21, Galatage discloses a semiconductor structure, comprising:
a plurality of bottom channel members 103b (the bottom three nanoribbon layers 103b – the lower layers 103b) disposed over a substrate (see Fig. 1A);
a bottom gate structure 122 wrapping around the plurality of bottom channel members 103b;
a bottom source/drain feature 105c, 105d interfacing with end sidewalls of the plurality of bottom channel members 103b;
a first semiconductor layer (the topmost layer 103b) over the plurality of bottom channel members (the lower layers 103b);
a first bonding layer (lower layer 120) over the plurality of bottom channel members 103b over and interfacing a top surface of the first semiconductor layer 103b (topmost layer 103b);
a second bonding layer 120 (upper layer 120) disposed over and interfacing the first bonding layer 120 (lower layer 120);
a second semiconductor layer 103a (the bottommost layer 103a) over and interfacing the second bonding layer 120;
a plurality of top channel members (the top three nanoribbon layers 103a - the upper layers 103a) over the second bonding semiconductor layer 120;
a top gate structure 122 wrapping around the plurality of top channel members 103a; and
a top source/drain feature 105a, 105b interfacing with end sidewalls of the plurality of top channel members 103a,
wherein the first bonding layer 120 and the second bonding layer 120 comprise metal nitride, metal oxide, silicon carbide, graphene, or diamond (see para. 0063).
Regarding claim 24, Galatage discloses the semiconductor structure of claim 21, wherein the bottom source/drain feature comprises silicon germanium (SiGe) and a p-type dopant,
wherein the top source/drain feature comprises silicon (Si) and an n-type dopant. See para. 0064.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 103
8. 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.
9. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galatage et al. (US 2023/0402507)
Regarding claim 15, Galatage discloses the semiconductor structure of claim 10, comprising all claimed limitations, as discussed above, further comprising:
a plurality of inner spacer features 132 interleaving the plurality of bottom channel members 103b.
Galatage does not specifically disclose wherein the plurality of inner spacer features 132 comprise silicon oxycarbonitride.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time the invention was made that silicon oxycarbonitride is a well known material for inner spacer, and that selecting a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use is just within the general skill of a worker in the art.
MPEP § 2144.07 states that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) (Claims to a printing ink comprising a solvent having the vapor pressure characteristics of butyl carbitol so that the ink would not dry at room temperature but would dry quickly upon heating were held invalid over a reference teaching a printing ink made with a different solvent that was nonvolatile at room temperature but highly volatile when heated in view of an article which taught the desired boiling point and vapor pressure characteristics of a solvent for printing inks and a catalog teaching the boiling point and vapor pressure characteristics of butyl carbitol; “Reading a list and selecting a known compound to meet known requirements is no more ingenious than selecting the last piece to put in the last opening in a jig-saw puzzle.” 325 U.S. at 335, 65 USPQ at 301.). See also In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (selection of aknown plastic to make a container of a type made of plastics prior to the invention washeld to be obvious); Ryco, Inc. v. Ag-Bag Corp., 857 F.2d 1418, 8 USPQ2d 1323(Fed. Cir. 1988) (Claimed agricultural bagging machine, which differed from a prior art machine only in that the brake means were hydraulically operated rather than mechanically operated, was held to be obvious over the prior art machine in view of references which disclosed hydraulic brakes for performing the same function, albeit in a different environment.).
Caterpillar Inc. v. Deere & Co., 224 F.3d 1374, 56USPQ2d 1305 (Fed. Cir. 2000); Al-Site Corp. v. VSI Int ’ l, Inc., 174 F.3d 1308, 1316, 50 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999); Chiuminatta Concrete Concepts, Inc. v. Cardinal Indus. Inc., 145 F.3d 1303, 1309, 46 USPQ2d 1752, 1757 (Fed. Cir. 1998); Lockheed Aircraft Corp. v. United States , 193 USPQ 449, 461 (Ct. Cl. 1977 ); Data Line Corp. v. Micro Technologies, Inc., 813 F.2d 1196, 1 USPQ2d 2052 (Fed. Cir. 1987). In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
See also MPEP § 2183.
Allowable Subject Matter
10. Claims 13-14, and 22-23 are allowable.
See the Office action of 05/12/2026 for details.
Conclusion
11. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Dao H. Nguyen whose telephone number is (571)272-1791. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven Loke, can be reached on (571)272-1657. The fax numbers for all communication(s) is 571-273-8300.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is (571)272-1633.
/Dao H Nguyen/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818
October 2, 2026
