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 .
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.
Claims 1-6, 8, and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lu (US Pub. No. 2011/0233714).
Regarding claim 1, in FIG. 1, Lu discloses an electrostatic discharge protection device (device is capable of being used in this manner), comprising: a semiconductor substrate (17); a first well region (17a/17b) having a first conductivity type (P) located in the semiconductor substrate; and a second well region (17b/17a) having the first conductivity type located in the semiconductor substrate and adjacent to the first well region, wherein a first bottom of the first well region and a second bottom of the second well region are connected to each other and have different profiles, wherein the first well region and the second well region have different doping concentrations (paragraphs [0089]-[0090]), and wherein an interface between the first well region and the second well region is located below an isolation feature (8).
Regarding claim 2, in FIG. 1, Lu discloses a first doping concentration of the first well region (17b) is less than a second doping concentration of the second well region (17a) (paragraphs [0089]-[0090]).
Regarding claim 3, in FIG. 1, Lu discloses that the first bottom of the first well region (17b) has a wave bottom surface and the second bottom of the second well region (17a) has an arc bottom surface.
Regarding claim 4, in FIG. 1, Lu discloses that the wave bottom surface of the first well region includes a plurality of wave crests and a plurality of wave troughs, wherein the wave crests are closer to a top surface of the semiconductor substrate (e.g. surface of 17 facing 10) than the wave troughs.
Regarding claim 5, in FIG. 1, Lu discloses that the first well region has first sub-regions and second sub-regions alternately arranged with the first sub-regions, wherein the wave troughs are the bottom surface of the first sub-regions, and the wave crests are the bottom surface of the second sub-regions.
Regarding claim 6, in FIG. 1, Lu discloses that the first sub-regions have a first depth, and the second sub-regions have a second depth that is different from the first depth (as measured from the surface of 17 facing 10).
Regarding claim 8, in FIG. 1, Lu discloses that the arc bottom surface of the second well region only includes one wave trough that protrudes in a direction away from the top surface of the semiconductor substrate.
Regarding claim 14, in FIG. 1, Lu discloses an electrostatic discharge protection device (device is capable of being used in this manner), comprising: a semiconductor substrate (17); a first well region (17a/17b) having a first conductivity type (P) located in the semiconductor substrate; and a second well region (17b/17a) having the first conductivity type located in the semiconductor substrate and adjacent to the first well region, wherein a first number of first arc bottoms of the first well region is different from a second number of second arc bottoms of the second well region, wherein the first well region and the second well region have different doping concentrations (paragraphs [0089]-[0090]), and wherein an interface between the first well region and the second well region is located below an isolation feature (8).
Regarding claim 15, in FIG. 1, Lu discloses that the first number of the first arc bottoms of the first well region (17b) is greater than or equal to 2, and the second number of second arc bottoms of the second well region (17a) is equal to 1.
Regarding claim 16, in FIG. 1, Lu discloses that the first arc bottoms are connected to each other in turn to form a wave bottom surface of the first well region.
Regarding claim 17, in FIG. 1, Lu discloses that a first depth measured from the bottommost point of one of the first arc bottoms of the first well region to a top surface of the first well region is equal to a second depth measured from the bottommost point of the second arc bottom of the second well region to a top surface of the second well region.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 9-13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims for the same reasons set forth in the 3/30/2026 Office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-17 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUCKER J WRIGHT whose telephone number is (571)270-3234. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, Matthew Landau can be reached at 571-272-1731. 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.
/TUCKER J WRIGHT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2891
Prosecution Insights