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 (encompassing claims 1-17 and newly added claims 21-23) in the reply filed on 2/18/26 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 11/7/23. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
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 applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 6 is 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.
Claim 6 recites the term “about”. The term "about" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite; it is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. “About” is defined as "almost or nearly—used to indicate that a number, amount, time, etc., is not exact or certain” (see Merriam Webster online dictionary). The term “about” modifies a target, and implicitly requires boundaries at some maximum value above the target and at some minimum value below the target beyond which one is not “about” the target any more. Neither the claims, nor the specification, defines these boundaries. Thus, it is unclear whether one must be within some small percentage of deviation of the target (such as 0.01 %, 0.1 %, 1 %, 2 %, 5 %, 10 %, or some other percentage) or within a certain number of units of the target and specifically which of these possible values defines the boundaries. If one were to poll 100 people having ordinary skill in the art, there would be many different responses for the boundaries. Thus, determining whether one is infringing the limitation is subjective, rather than objective, and thus the claim is unclear. Therefore, the claim is rejected as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant, regards as the invention.
Examiner acknowledges Applicant has attempted to define “about” as “within certain variations (such as +/- 10% or other variations)” in the Specification ([0009]). However, the use of the phrase “such as” implies that “+/- 10%” is given merely as an example but is non-exhaustive. Furthermore, it is unclear what is encompassed by “other variations” and when are specifically applicable.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-5, 7-17, and 21-23 are allowed.
Claim 1 contains allowable subject matter because of the limitation of recessing the substrate from the backside of the structure to expose a bottom surface of the isolation structure; forming a backside dielectric layer covering the bottom surface of the isolation structure; depositing an etch stop layer on a bottom surface of the backside dielectric layer; forming an opening in the etch stop layer, wherein the opening exposes the fin-shape base from the backside of the structure; etching the fin-shape base from the opening to expose the epitaxial feature; and forming a backside conductive feature in the opening and in physical contact with the epitaxial feature. Claims 2-5 and 7-10 depend on claim 1.
Claim 11 contains allowable subject matter because of the limitation of thinning down the structure from the backside of the structure until the isolation structure is exposed; recessing the isolation structure such that a bottom portion of the fin protrudes from the isolation structure; depositing a backside dielectric layer on sidewalls of the bottom portion of the fin, wherein the backside dielectric layer covers the isolation structure; etching the fin from the backside of the structure to form a backside trench exposing a bottom surface of the source/drain feature, wherein during the etching of the fin the backside dielectric layer remains intact; and, depositing a conductive feature in the backside trench. Claims 12-17 depend on claim 11.
Claim 21 contains allowable subject matter because of the limitation thinning down the substrate from a backside of the substrate until the isolation structure is exposed; recessing the isolation structure such that a bottom portion of the fin-shaped structure protrudes from a bottom surface of the isolation structure; depositing a backside dielectric layer covering the bottom surface of the isolation structure and sidewalls of the bottom portion of the fin-shaped structure; etching the fin-shaped structure to form a backside trench exposing a bottom surface of the source/drain feature; depositing a conductive feature in the backside trench. Claims 22-23 depend on claim 21.
Claim 6 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Chang et al. (U.S. 2021/0343578 A1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REEMA PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-1436. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8am-5pm EST.
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, Christine Kim can be reached at (571)272-8458. 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.
/REEMA PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812 4/30/2026
Prosecution Insights