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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11/20/2024 and 08/22/2025 were filed before the first action on the merits. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-8, 10-12 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tsai et al. (2019/0067111).
Re claim 1, Tsai teaches a method for fabricating a semiconductor device (Figs. 1A-2H), the method comprising: forming a plurality of stacked structures (110a/110b, 104, 106) spaced apart from each other over a substrate (102) and sequentially stacking fins (110a, 110b) and sacrificial patterns (104, 106); forming sacrificial spacers (112) on both sides of each of the stacked structures (110a/110b, 104, 106) ; etching (Fig. 2D) an exposed portion of the substrate between adjacent sacrificial spacers (112) to form a plurality of dividing trenches (117) extending in a first direction and spaced apart in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction (Fig. 2D), the dividing trench (117) defining an active region [49] including a fin body having a width greater than a width of the fins and the fins on the fin body (Fig. 2G); and forming an isolation layer (118) in each of the plurality of the dividing trench (117), the isolation layer (118) including an air gap (121) and a capping layer (160).
Re claim 2, Tsai teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the forming a plurality of stacked structures includes: sequentially forming a fin material layer [14] and first to third sacrificial layers (104, 106, 114) over the substrate (102); forming a mask pattern (210) over the third sacrifice layer (114); and sequentially etching the third sacrifice layer to the first sacrifice layer and the fin material layer using the mask pattern (Figs. 2C-D).
Re claim 3, Tsai teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the fin (110a/110b) includes a semiconductor material [25].
Re claim 4, Tsai teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the sacrificial pattern includes an insulating material [16-17]. Re claim 5, Tsai teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the capping layer (160) includes silicon oxide [50] having a bad step coverage. Re claim 7, Tsai teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein each of the sacrificial spacers (112) includes a material having an etch selectivity with respect to the substrate [15, 112].
Re claim 8, Tsai teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein each of the sacrificial spacers (112) includes nitride or oxide [112].
Re claim 10, Tsai teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein each of the isolation layers has a width narrower than that of the fin body (Fig. 2H).
Re claim 11, Tsai teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein an upper surface of the fin body and an upper surface of each of the isolation layers are at a same level (Fig. 2H).
Re claim 12, Tsai teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein an upper surface of the fin is at a level higher than upper surfaces of the isolation layers (Fig. 2H).
Re claim 15, Tsai teaches the method according to claim 1, further comprising: forming a gate structure partially covering the active region and the isolation layers [53-54], and extending in the second direction [53-54]; and forming a source/drain region covering the fin on both sides of the gate structure [53-54].
Re claim 16, Tsai teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the source/drain region includes the fin on both sides of the gate structure and an epitaxial layer grown from the fin [52-54].
Claim(s) 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tsai et al. (2019/0067111).
Re claim 17, Tsai teaches a method for fabricating a semiconductor device (Figs. 1A-2H), the method comprising: forming a stacked structure (110a/110b, 104, 106) of a fin (110a/110b) and a sacrificial pattern (104, 106) on a substrate (102); forming sacrificial spacers (112) on both sides of the stacked structure (110a/110b, 104, 106); forming a dividing trench (117) by etching an exposed portion of the substrate (102) between the sacrificial spacers (112), which are consecutively disposed; and forming an isolation layer (118) in the dividing trench (117), the isolation layer (118) including an air gap (121) and a capping layer (160).
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.
Claim(s) 6, 9 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. (2019/0067111) in view of Lin et al. (2020/0118867). Re claim 6, Tsai teaches the method according to claim 1.
Tsai does not explicitly teach wherein the capping layer is one selected from USG oxide, TEOS oxide, and HDP oxide.
Lin teaches a method (Figs. 1-17F) wherein a capping layer (88) is one selected from USG oxide, TEOS oxide, and HDP oxide [49]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tsai as taught by Lin since all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to a skilled artisan at the time the invention was made.
Re claim 9, Tsai teaches the method according to claim 1,
Tsai does not explicitly teach wherein each of the sacrificial spacers includes any one of insulating materials selected from SiO2, SiON, SiBN, and SiBCN.
Lin teaches a method (Figs. 1-17F) wherein each of sacrificial spacers (56) includes any one of insulating materials selected from SiO2, SiON, SiBN, and SiBCN [23].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tsai as taught by Lin since all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to a skilled artisan at the time the invention was made. Re claim 13, Tsai teaches the method according to claim 1.
Tsai does not explicitly teach wherein the fin body and the fin are made of different materials.
Lin teaches a method (Figs. 1-17F) wherein a fin body and a fin are made of different materials [27].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tsai as taught by Lin since all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to a skilled artisan at the time the invention was made.
Re claim 14, Tsai teaches the method according to claim 1.
Tsai does not explicitly teach wherein a stacked structure of the fin/the fin body is one of stacked structures of semiconductor materials among SiGe/Si, Ge/Si, high concentration SiGe/low concentration SiGe, GeSn/Ge, and Sn/Ge. Lin teaches a method (Figs. 1-17F) wherein a stacked structure of a fin/a fin body is one of stacked structures of semiconductor materials among SiGe/Si, Ge/Si, high concentration SiGe/low concentration SiGe, GeSn/Ge, and Sn/Ge [30].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tsai as taught by Lin since all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to a skilled artisan at the time the invention was made.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM S BOWEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3984. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Fernando Toledo can be reached at 571-272-1867. 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.
/FERNANDO L TOLEDO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2897
/ADAM S BOWEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2897