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 Invention I in the reply filed on 3/3/2026 is acknowledged.
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.
Claims 21 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen et al (US Publication No. 2019/0252554).
Regarding claim 21, Chen discloses a method of forming a semiconductor device Fig 1-11, comprising: disposing a first metal layer Fig 3, 24A over a substrate Fig 3, 20; forming a first oxide layer Fig 3, 22/26A/28A over the first metal layer, wherein the first oxide layer wraps around the first metal layer when viewed from a cross-sectional view Fig 3; forming a 2D material layer Fig 4, 30A over the first oxide layer Fig 4, 22/26A/28A and extending across the first metal layer such that the 2D material layer is on opposite sides of the first metal layer Fig 5, wherein the 2D material layer is a semiconductor ¶0020-0021;forming a second oxide layer Fig 6, 32A over the 2D material layer Fig 6, 30A; and disposing a second metal layer Fig 10, 24B over the second oxide layer Fig 6, 32B.
Regarding claim 23, Chen discloses wherein the first oxide layer interfaces with the 2D material layer and the first metal layer Fig 3-11.
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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Medina Silva et al (US Publication No. 2022/0278276) in view of Bessonov et al (US Publication No. 2017/0015599).
Regarding claim 1, Medina Silva discloses a method of forming a semiconductor device, comprising: forming a 2D material layer Fig 7-8 MoS2 over a bottom metal layer Fig 7-8 Bottom electrode ¶0059 and 0077; forming a top metal layer Fig 7-8 Top electrode ¶0059 and 0077over the 2D material layer Fig 7-8 MoS2; and performing a treatment to the 2D material layer ¶0032 and 0067, to form an oxide region interfacing both the 2D material layer and the top metal layer Fig 7-8. Medina Silva discloses all the limitations but silent on the specifics of the 2D material treatment. Whereas Bessonov discloses a method of forming a semiconductor device Fig 1, comprising: forming a 2D material layer Fig 1; performing an oxidation treatment to the 2D material layer, to form an oxide region Fig 1 ¶0050-0052, 0062-0063. Medina Silva and Bessonov are analogous art because they are directed to devices with 2D materials and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Medina Silva because they are from the same field of endeavor. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the treatment step and incorporate the teachings of Bessonov as an alternative treatment known in the art to form an oxide layer.
Regarding claim 2, Bessonov discloses wherein the oxidation treatment is performed using a UV ozone oxidation ¶0051, 0055, 0059, 0062-0063.
Regarding claim 3, Medina Silva discloses wherein the 2D material layer is a semiconductor Fig 1 ¶0045.
Regarding claim 4, Medina Silva discloses wherein the 2D material layer is transition metal dichalcogenide (TMD) Fig 1 ¶0045.
Regarding claim 5, Medina Silva discloses wherein the top metal layer is Au, Ag, Pt, or a combination thereof ¶0059.
Claims 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chung et al (US Publication No. 2022/0165871) in view of Bessonov et al (US Publication No. 2017/0015599).
Regarding claim 6, Chung discloses a method of forming a semiconductor device, comprising: depositing a metal layer Fig 14A-14B, 112A/112B ¶0053 over a 2D material layer Fig 14A-14B, 110 ¶0053; patterning the metal layer to form a patterned metal layer covering a first portion of the 2D material layer¶0053, while leaving a second portion of the 2D material layer exposed Fig 14A-14B. Chung discloses all the limitations but silent on the oxidation process. Whereas Bessonov discloses a method of forming a semiconductor device Fig 1, comprising: forming a 2D material layer Fig 1; selectively oxidizing the first portion of the 2D material layer to form an oxidized region, while leaving at least a region of the second portion of the 2D material layer un-oxidized Fig 1 ¶0050-0052, 0062-0063. Chung and Bessonov are analogous art because they are directed to devices with 2D materials and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Chung because they are from the same field of endeavor. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the treatment step and incorporate the teachings of Bessonov to improve device performance.
Regarding claim 7, Bessonov discloses wherein the oxidized region is between the metal layer and the un-oxidized region from a top view¶0050-0052.
Regarding claim 8, Chung in view of Bessonov discloses wherein the metal layer spaced apart from the un- oxidized region Chung Fig 14A-14B; Bessonov - Fig 1 ¶0050-0052, 0062-0063.
Regarding claim 920, Bessonov discloses wherein the selectively oxidizing step is performed using a UV ozone oxidation¶0050-0052.
Regarding claim 10, Bessonov discloses wherein the oxidized region is between the metal layer and the un-oxidized region when viewed from a cross-sectional view¶0050-0052.
Claims 22, 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al (US Publication No. 2019/0252554) in view of Sharma et al (US Publication No. 2020/0388685).
Regarding claim 22, Chen discloses all the limitations but silent on the arrangement of the 2D material layer. Whereas Sharma discloses wherein the second oxide layer interfaces with the second metal layer and the 2D material layer Fig 14. Chen and Sharma are analogous art because they are directed to devices with 2D materials and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Chen because they are from the same field of endeavor. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the arrangement of the 2D material layer and incorporate the teachings of Sharma as an alternative arrangement as a matter of design choice and device choice.
Regarding claim 28, Sharma in view of Chen discloses wherein the second oxide layer has a U-shape when viewed from a cross-sectional view Fig 14.
Regarding claim 29, Sharma in view of Chen discloses wherein the second oxide layer has a top surface higher than a top surface of the second metal layer and lower than a top surface of the 2D material layer Fig 14.
Claims 24-27, 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al (US Publication No. 2019/0252554) in view of Bessonov et al (US Publication No. 2017/0015599).
Regarding claim 24, Chen discloses all the limitations but silent on the type of material. Whereas Bessonov discloses wherein the 2D material layer and the first oxide layer comprises a same transition metal ¶0049-0052 and 0055. Chen and Bessonov are analogous art because they are directed to devices with 2D materials and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Chen because they are from the same field of endeavor. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the material used and incorporate the teachings of Bessonov 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 design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (1960).
Regarding claim 25, Bessonov in view of Chen discloses wherein the transition metal of the 2D material layer and the first oxide layer is tungsten¶0049-0052 and 0055.
Regarding claim 26, Bessonov in view of Chen discloses wherein the 2D material layer and the oxide layer comprises a same transition metal ¶0049-0052 and 0055.
Regarding claim 27, Bessonov in view of Chen discloses wherein the transition metal of the 2D material layer and the second oxide layer is tungsten¶0049-0052 and 0055.
Regarding claim 30, Bessonov in view of Chen discloses wherein the first oxide layer is W02, W03, or a combination thereof ¶0049-0052 and 0055.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE A ENAD whose telephone number is (571)270-7891. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:30 am -4:30 pm.
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.
/CHRISTINE A ENAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2811
Prosecution Insights