DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 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. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 1- 3 , 6 , and 8 - 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20 20/0066729 A1 to Simsek-Ege et al. (“ Simsek-Ege ”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20 03 /0 124818 A1 to L uo et al. (“ L uo ”) . As to claim 1 , although Simsek-Ege discloses a method of manufacturing a semiconductor device, comprising: providing a substrate (¶ 0014) ; forming a bit line (104) on the substrate (¶ 0014) ; forming an isolation spacer (110, 148) on a side of the bit line (104) , wherein the isolation spacer (110, 148) comprises an air gap (148) ; forming a landing pad (134) over the bit line (104) ; and performing a deposition process to form an air gap protection structure (150) to cover the landing pad (134) and the air gap (148) (See Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Fig. 5 , Fig. 6 , Fig. 9, Fig. 10, ¶ 0014, ¶ 0021, ¶ 0025, ¶ 0026, ¶ 0035 , ¶ 0037, ¶ 0039, ¶ 0045, ¶ 0047, ¶ 0048 ) (Notes: the limitation “landing pad” is interpreted as a contact layer) , Simsek-Ege does not further disclose wherein a temperature during the deposition process ranges between about 530°C and about 570°C . However, Simsek-Ege does disclose the air protection structure (150) comprises at least one dielectric material, such as silicon dioxide , phosphosilicate glass , borosilicate glass , borophosphosilicate glass , fluorosilicate glass , aluminum oxide , high-k oxides, such as HfOx , a combination thereof, a dielectric nitride material (e.g., SiN, a dielectric an oxynitride material (e.g., SiON), a dielectric carbonitride material (e.g., SiCN), and a dielectric carboxynitride material (e.g., SiOCN), and amphorous carbon and formed using conventional processes (e.g., conventional deposition processes) and conventional processing equipmen t (See ¶ 0047, ¶ 0048) and Luo further discloses wherein a temperature during the deposition process of silicon oxide , silicon oxynitride, and silicon nitride ranges between about 530°C and about 570°C (See ¶ 0024, ¶ 0070, ¶ 0071, ¶ 0085) . In view of the teachings of Simsek-Ege and Luo, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Simsek-Ege to have wherein a temperature during the deposition process ranges between about 530°C and about 570°C because the deposition processes of silicon oxide , silicon oxynitride, and silicon nitride are well-known in the art with suitable parameters such as between about 530°C and about 570°C , where the parameters of at least temperature and gas mix are relatively controlled to determine the deposition rate and uniformity (See Luo ¶ 0024). As to claim 2 , Simsek-Ege in view of Luo further discloses wherein gases used in the deposition process comprise SiH 4 , NH 3 , tetramethylsilane, and N 2 (Se e Luo ¶ 0024, ¶ 0070, ¶ 0071, ¶ 0085) . As to claim 3 , Simsek-Ege in view of Luo further discloses wherein He is not used during the deposition process (See Luo ¶ 0070, ¶ 0071, ¶ 0085) . As to claim 6 , Simsek-Ege in view of Luo further discloses wherein a flow rate of NH 3 during the deposition process is equal to or greater than 600 sccm (See Luo ¶ 0071) . As to claim 8 , Simsek-Ege in view of Luo further discloses wherein a flow rate of N 2 during the deposition process is less than 10000 sccm (See Luo ¶ 0071) . As to claim 9 , Simsek-Ege in view of Luo further discloses wherein a deposition rate of the air gap protection structure (150) is less than 15 Å /sec (See Luo ¶ 0085) . As to claim 10 , Simsek-Ege further discloses wherein the air gap protection structure (150) has an upper portion (narrower top) above a top surface (in contact with 106) of the landing pad (134) and a lower portion (wider middle) below the upper portion (narrower top), and a ratio between a thickness of the lower portion (wider middle) and a thickness of the upper portion (narrower top) is equal to or greater than 0.66 (See Fig. 10) (Notes: the limitation “portion” is defined as a part of any whole, either separated from or integrated with it by Dictionary.com) . Claim(s) 1- 2 , 4-5 , and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20 20/0066729 A1 to Simsek-Ege et al. (“ Simsek-Ege ”) in view of U .S. Patent No. 7 , 476 , 621 B1 to Nguyen et al. (“ Nguyen” ) . As to claim 1 , although Simsek-Ege discloses a method of manufacturing a semiconductor device, comprising: providing a substrate (¶ 0014) ; forming a bit line (104) on the substrate (¶ 0014) ; forming an isolation spacer (110, 148) on a side of the bit line (104) , wherein the isolation spacer (110, 148) comprises an air gap (148) ; forming a landing pad (134) over the bit line (104) ; and performing a deposition process to form an air gap protection structure (150) to cover the landing pad (134) and the air gap ( 148) (See Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Fig. 4, Fig. 5, Fig. 9, Fig. 10, ¶ 0014, ¶ 0021, ¶ 0025, ¶ 0026, ¶ 0035, ¶ 0037, ¶ 0039, ¶ 0045, ¶ 0047, ¶ 0048) , Simsek-Ege does not further disclose wherein a temperature during the deposition process ranges between about 530°C and about 570°C . However, Simsek-Ege does disclose the air protection structure (150) comprises at least one dielectric material, such as silicon dioxide , phosphosilicate glass , borosilicate glass , borophosphosilicate glass , fluorosilicate glass , aluminum oxide , high-k oxides, such as HfOx , a combination thereof, a dielectric nitride material (e.g., SiN, a dielectric an oxynitride material (e.g., SiON), a dielectric carbonitride material (e.g., SiCN), and a dielectric carboxynitride material (e.g., SiOCN), and amphorous carbon and formed using conventional processes (e.g., conventional deposition processes) and conventional processing equipmen t (See ¶ 0047, ¶ 0048) and Nguyen further discloses wherein a temperature during the deposition process of SiO 2 , Si 3 N 4 , PSG, and BPSG ranges between about 530°C and about 570°C (See Column 4, lines 3- 67, Column 5, lines 1-29, Column 10, lines 9-21 ) . In view of the teachings of Simsek-Ege and Nguyen, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Simsek-Ege to have wherein a temperature during the deposition process ranges between about 530°C and about 570°C because the deposition processes of SiO 2 , Si 3 N 4 , PSG, and BPSG are well-known in the art with suitable parameters such as between about 530°C and about 570°C , where the parameters temperatures , precursors, and flow rates are adjusted to obtain efficient deposition reaction (See Nguyen Column 5, lines 4-29, Column 10, lines 9-21 ) . As to claim 2 , Simsek-Ege in view of Nguyen further discloses wherein gases used in the deposition process comprise SiH 4 , NH 3 , tetramethylsilane, and N 2 (See Nguyen Column 4, lines 23-42 ) . As to claim 4 , Simsek-Ege in view of Nguyen further discloses wherein a pressure of the deposition process is less than 3 torr (See Nguyen Column 4, lines 19-22, Column 5, lines 4-14). As to claim 5 , Simsek-Ege in view of Nguyen further discloses wherein a flow rate of SiH 4 during the deposition process is equal to or greater than 200 sccm (See Nguyen Column 4, line 59). As to claim 7 , Simsek-Ege in view of Nguyen further discloses wherein a flow rate of tetramethylsilane during the deposition process is equal to or greater than 45 sccm (See Nguyen Column 5, lines 4-7). Further, the applicant also has not established the critical nature of the “ pressure, flow rate , deposition rate, and ratio ”. “The law is replete with cases in which the difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is some range or other variable within the claims….In such a situation, the applicant must show that the particular range is critical, generally by showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results relative to the prior art range.” In re Woodruff , 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir.1990). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have various ranges. It would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentations to adjust pressure, flow rate, deposition rate, and ratio to obtain the desired air gap protection structure . See also In re Huang , 40 USPQ2d 1685, 1688 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (claimed ranges of a result effective variable, which do not overlap the prior art ranges, are unpatentable unless they produce a new and unexpected result which is different in kind and not merely in degree from the results of the prior art). See also In re Boesch , 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA) (discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within skill of art) and In re Aller , 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955) (selection of optimum ranges within prior art general conditions is obvious). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Enter examiner's name" \* MERGEFORMAT DAVID CHEN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-7438 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 12-6 . 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 JOSHUA BENITEZ can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 270-1435 . 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. /DAVID CHEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815