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 Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 3/3/2026 . Applicant has elected Group I, corresponding to claims 1-16. The examiner also acknowledges new claims 21-24, which pertain to this same elected invention Group I . Next, t he examiner acknowledges the applicant’s cancellation of claims 17-20. Finally, Invention Group II, corresponding to the canceled claims 17-20, is withdrawn from further consideration. Drawings 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 following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Claim 12: conformally forming a first spacer layer to cover the first fin portion, the second fin portion, the first gate structure, and the second gate structure; and forming a pair of spacers to laterally cover vertical portions of the first spacer layer, which laterally cover one of the first gate structure and the second gate structure. Claim 13: conformally forming a second spacer layer on the first spacer layer; removing horizontal portions of the second spacer layer by an etching process to form a plurality of the spacers laterally covering the vertical portions of the first spacer layer, which laterally cover the first gate structure and the second gate structure; forming a patterned photoresist layer to cover the spacers laterally covering the vertical portions of the first spacer layer, which laterally cover the first 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. 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 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claims 12-13 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. Regarding Claims 12-13 , the applicant recites “a pair of spacers” and “a plurality of spacers” and “removing the spacer” however it is unclear whether these spacers are distinct features, or what spacer is being removed (in claim 13). For the sake of compact prosecution, the examiner presumes that the spacers are distinct, and claim 12 “pair of spacers” refers to the features 541b and 541c in Fig. 29, and the claim 13 “plurality of spacers” refers to 542’ in Fig. 30. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claims 1- 2 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Thei (US # 20190081041). Regarding Claim 1 , Thei (US # 20190081041) teaches a method for manufacturing a semiconductor device (see Figs. 3-15 and corresponding text), comprising: forming a first fin portion (corresponds to structure in region 103) and a second fin portion (corresponds to structure in region 102) on a semiconductor substrate (106; [0017] describes these transistors as being fin-type FETs), the first fin portion and the second fin portion being spaced apart from each other (space is shown between the features); and right 365125 forming a first gate dielectric layer (302, 502) and a second gate dielectric layer (502 only) on the first fin portion and the second fin portion, respectively , the first gate dielectric layer having a first thickness (larger), the second gate dielectric layer having a second thickness (smaller) different from the first thickness. Regarding Claim 2 , Thei teaches the method as claimed in claim 1, wherein formation of the first gate dielectric layer and the second gate dielectric layer includes: forming a first dielectric material film (302) to cover the first fin portion and the second fin portion (see Fig. 3); forming a patterned photoresist layer (see Fig. 4; [0021]) to cover a portion of the first dielectric material film on the first fin portion (resist is described, but not shown in the figure); removing a remaining portion of the first dielectric material film (302 is removed) exposed from the patterned photoresist layer so as to form a first gate dielectric film (302) on the first fin portion (this is necessary to get the final gate dielectric configuration); removing the patterned photoresist layer (described in the final sentence of [0021] but not shown); and forming a second gate dielectric film (502) on the first gate dielectric film and the second fin portion, so as to form the first gate dielectric layer (302+502) on the first fin portion and the second gate dielectric layer (502 only) on the second fin portion, the first gate dielectric layer including the first gate dielectric film and a first portion of the second gate dielectric film disposed on the first gate dielectric film (shown), the second gate dielectric layer including a second portion of the second gate dielectric film (shown), the first thickness of the first gate dielectric layer being greater than the second thickness of the second gate dielectric layer (shown). Regarding Claim 1 4 , Chen teaches the same essential features here as recited in claim 1. Claims 1 and 11 - 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen (US # 20240347588) . Regarding Claim 1 , Chen (US # 20240347588) teaches a method for manufacturing a semiconductor device (see Figs. 1-11 and corresponding text) , comprising: forming a first fin portion ( 20, especially see Fig. 5 ) and a second fin portion ( 22 ) on a semiconductor substrate (12) , the first fin portion and the second fin portion being spaced apart from each other (shown spaced by isolation features 50 ) ; and right 1607820 forming a first gate dielectric layer ( 42 ) and a second gate dielectric layer ( 48 ) on the first fin portion and the second fin portion, respectively, the first gate dielectric layer having a first thickness, the second gate dielectric layer having a second thickness different from the first thickness ([ 0019 , 22]; thickness of the gate dielectric layer 42 on the HV region 14 is greater than the thickness of the gate dielectric layer 48 on the MV region 16 ) . Regarding Claim 1 1 , Chen teaches the same essential features here as recited in claim 1. Regarding Claim 1 4 , Chen teaches the same essential features here as recited in claim 1. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. 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 3- 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US # 20240347588) in view of Crowder (US # 20030094660) and Ting (US # 20200357802) . Regarding Claim 3 , a lthough Chen discloses much of the claimed invention, it does not explicitly teach the method as claimed in claim 1, wherein formation of the first gate dielectric layer and the second gate dielectric layer includes: forming a patterned photoresist layer to cover the first fin portion; treating the second fin portion with a fluorine doping process; removing the patterned photoresist layer; and forming a gate dielectric material film on the first fin portion and the second fin portion, so as to form the first gate dielectric layer on the first fin portion and the second gate dielectric layer on the second fin portion, the first thickness of the first gate dielectric layer being less than the second thickness of the second gate dielectric layer. Nonetheless the prior art at the time the application was filed renders such non-explicit feature differences obvious, as explained below. For example, Crowder (US # 20030094660) is in the same or analogous field, and it teaches a method wherein formation of a first gate dielectric layer and a second gate dielectric layer includes: forming a patterned photoresist layer (6) to cover a first transistor portion (see Fig. 1) ; treating a second portion with a halogen-type doping process (Cl or Br implant , as opposed to fluorine); removing the patterned photoresist layer ([0033]) ; and forming a gate dielectric material film (see Fig. 4, features 4, 5) on the first fin portion (4) and the second fin portion (5) , so as to form a first thickness of the first gate dielectric layer being less than the second thickness of the second gate dielectric layer (feature 4 is thicker than feature 5) . As a second example, Ting (US # 20200357802) also teaches a method of forming transistors, including the modifying of the growth rates of oxide growth using ions, such as nitrogen (decrease oxide growth rate) and fluorine implants (increase oxide growth rate ; see [0024]). A person having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized th at modifying the gate dielectric formation of Chen with the implantation techniques suggested by Crowder and Ting would be obvious. Specifically, the modification suggested by Crowder and Ting would be to employ a method as claimed in claim 1, wherein formation of the first gate dielectric layer and the second gate dielectric layer includes: forming a patterned photoresist layer to cover the first fin portion; treating the second fin portion with a fluorine doping process; removing the patterned photoresist layer; and forming a gate dielectric material film on the first fin portion and the second fin portion, so as to form the first gate dielectric layer on the first fin portion and the second gate dielectric layer on the second fin portion, the first thickness of the first gate dielectric layer being less than the second thickness of the second gate dielectric layer. The rationale for this obvious modification is that the ion implantation reduces the number of photoresist masks and associated removal steps . This would have been apparent to a person having ordinary skill in the art in reading both references because the existence and benefits of modulating dielectric thicknesses are well known in the art (see MPEP 2144.01). Regarding Claim 4 , Ting, as applied to claim 3, teaches a method as claimed in claim 3, wherein the fluorine doping process is conducted by implantation or thermal diffusion ( [0024] ) . Regarding Claim 5 , Crowder , as applied to claim 3, teaches the method wherein the doping process is conducted by implantation at an energy ranging from 1 KeV to 400 KeV ( [0030] ) . And Ting, as applied to claim 3 and 4, teaches that the implanted halogen ion is also fluorine. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was made to use fluorine , since it has been held by the courts that selection of a prior art material on the basis of its suitability for its intended purpose is within the level of ordinary skill. In re Leshing , 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) and Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp ., 65 USPQ 297 (1945). Regarding Claim 6 , Crowder , as applied to claim 3, teaches the method wherein the doping process is conducted by implantation at a dose ranging from 1x 10 10 atoms/cm2 to 1x10 16 atoms/cm2 ( [0030] ) . And Ting, as applied to claim 3 and 4, teaches that the implanted halogen ion is also fluorine. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was made to use fluorine , since it has been held by the courts that selection of a prior art material on the basis of its suitability for its intended purpose is within the level of ordinary skill. In re Leshing , 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) and Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp ., 65 USPQ 297 (1945). Regarding Claim 15 , Chen teaches the same essential features here as recited in claim 3 . Claim 7 - 10 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US # 20240347588) in view of Crowder (US # 20030094660). Regarding Claim 7 , a lthough Chen discloses much of the claimed invention, it does not explicitly teach the method as claimed in claim 1, wherein formation of the first gate dielectric layer and the second gate dielectric layer includes: forming a patterned photoresist layer to cover the first fin portion; treating the second fin portion with a nitrogen doping process; removing the patterned photoresist layer; and forming a gate dielectric material film on the first fin portion and the second fin portion, so as to form the first gate dielectric layer on the first fin portion and the second gate dielectric layer on the second fin portion, the first thickness of the first gate dielectric layer being greater than the second thickness of the second gate dielectric layer. Nonetheless the prior art at the time the application was filed renders such non-explicit feature differences obvious, as explained below. For example, Crowder (US # 20030094660) is in the same or analogous field, and it teaches a method wherein a formation of a first gate dielectric layer (discussed below) and a second gate dielectric layer (discussed below) includes: forming a patterned photoresist layer (7) to cover a first fin portion (right side, see Fig. 2) ; treating a second fin portion (left side) with a nitrogen doping process ( [0034] ; see Fig. 2) ; removing the patterned photoresist layer ( [0037] ) ; and forming a gate dielectric material film on the first fin portion and the second fin portion (4 and 5 , respectively ), so as to form the first gate dielectric layer (4) on the first fin portion and the second gate dielectric layer (5) on the second fin portion, the first thickness of the first gate dielectric layer being greater than the second thickness of the second gate dielectric layer (shown in Fig. 4) . A person having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized th at modifying the gate dielectric formation of Chen with the ion implantations suggested by Crowder would be obvious. Specifically, the modification suggested by Crowder would be to employ a method as claimed in claim 1, wherein formation of the first gate dielectric layer and the second gate dielectric layer includes: forming a patterned photoresist layer to cover the first fin portion; treating the second fin portion with a nitrogen doping process; removing the patterned photoresist layer; and forming a gate dielectric material film on the first fin portion and the second fin portion, so as to form the first gate dielectric layer on the first fin portion and the second gate dielectric layer on the second fin portion, the first thickness of the first gate dielectric layer being greater than the second thickness of the second gate dielectric layer. The rationale for this obvious modification is that ion implantation reduces the number of photoresist masks and associated removal steps . This would have been apparent to a person having ordinary skill in the art in reading both references because the existence and benefits of modulating dielectric thicknesses are well known in the art (see MPEP 2144.01). Regarding Claim 8 , Crowder , as applied to claim 7 , teaches the method as claimed in claim 7, wherein the nitrogen doping process is conducted by implantation or thermal diffusion ( [0034] ) . Regarding Claim 9 , Crowder , as applied to claim 8 , teaches the method as claimed in claim 8, wherein the nitrogen doping process is conducted by implantation at an energy ranging from 1 KeV to 400 KeV ( [0034] ) . Regarding Claim 10 , Crowder , as applied to claim 8, teaches the method as claimed in claim 8, wherein the nitrogen doping process is conducted by implantation at a dose ranging from 1x 10 10 atoms/cm2 to 1x10 16 atoms/cm2. ( [0034] ) . Regarding Claim 1 6 , Chen teaches the same essential features here as recited in claim 7 . Claim 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US # 20240347588) in view of Ching (US # 20210043626 ) . Regarding Claim 21 , the same scope and explanation of claim 1 essentially applies to most of the limitations here. Although Chen discloses much of the claimed invention, it does not explicitly teach the method including a step of annealing one of the first gate dielectric layer and a second gate dielectric layer. Nonetheless the prior art at the time the application was filed renders such non-explicit feature differences obvious, as explained below. For example, Ching is in the same or analogous field, and it teaches a method ( [0046] ) including a step of annealing one of the first gate dielectric layer and a second gate dielectric layer ( [0046] ) . A person having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized th at modifying the dielectric formation of Chen with the annealing step suggested by Ching would be obvious. Specifically, the modification suggested by Ching would be to employ a method including a step of annealing one of the first gate dielectric layer and a second gate dielectric layer. The rationale for this obvious modification is that an annealing step improve s the material quality, such as increasing the material density and reducing the defects . Claim 2 3 - 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US # 20240347588) in view of Ching (US # 20210043626) , Crowder (US # 20030094660) , and Ting (US # 20200357802) . Regarding Claim 23 , Chen teaches the same essential features here as recited in claim 3 . Regarding Claim 2 4 , Chen teaches the same essential features here as recited in claim 7 . Claim 2 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US # 20240347588) in view of Ching (US # 20210043626 ) and further in view of King (US # 20040110337) . Regarding Claim 2 2 , a lthough Chen discloses much of the claimed invention, it does not explicitly teach the method as claimed in claim 21, wherein the one of the first gate dielectric layer and a second gate dielectric layer is annealed at a temperature ranging from 500 °C to 1600 °C. Nonetheless the prior art at the time the application was filed renders such non-explicit feature differences obvious, as explained below. For example, King is in the same or analogous field, and it teaches a method of anneal ing a gate dielectric ( 1040 ) at a temperature ranging from 500 °C to 1600 °C ([0182]) . A person having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized th at modifying the anneal of Chen in view of Ching with the temperature range suggested by King would be obvious. Specifically, the modification suggested by King would be to employ a method as claimed in claim 21, wherein the one of the first gate dielectric layer and a second gate dielectric layer is annealed at a temperature ranging from 500 °C to 1600 °C . The rationale for this obvious modification is that this annealing provides heal ing to any damage to the gate insulator ( [0181] ). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT CHRISTOPHER A JOHNSON whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-9475 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT normally working Monday to Friday between 9 am and 6 pm Eastern Time . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Brent Fairbanks can be reached on FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (408) 918-7532 . 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. /CHRISTOPHER A JOHNSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899