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 .
Applicant’s arguments and amendments filed 5/12/26 have been entered and considered.
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) 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakisaka (US 2005/0218473) in view of Johnson et al (7,633,373 B1).
Regarding claim 15, Wakisaka discloses a resistor structure (Figure 3), comprising: a resistor sheet (Figure 3, reference 3); and two landing pads (Figure 3, reference 4) at opposite ends of the resistor sheet (Figure 3, reference 3) with sidewall spacers (Figure 3, reference 5) around each landing pad (Figure 3, reference 4).
However, Wakisaka does not disclose a resistor sheet upon a dielectric buffer layer; and a capping layer that covers the two landing pads and extends downwards between the two landing pads to contact the resistor sheet and separate the two landing pads from each other.
Johnson et al discloses a resistor sheet (Figure 23B, reference 224) upon a dielectric buffer layer (Figure 23B, reference 216); and a capping layer (Figure 23B, reference 236) that covers the two landing pads (Figure 23B, reference 226) and extends downwards between the two landing pads (Figure 23B, reference 226) to contact the resistor sheet (Figure 23B, reference 224) and separate the two landing pads (Figure 23B, reference 226) from each other.
It would have been obvious, prior to the effective filing date of the instant application, for one having ordinary skill in the art, to modify Wakisaka with the teachings of Johnson et al for the purpose of stacking a resistor sheet upon a dielectric buffer layer; and a capping layer that covers the two landing pads and extends downwards between the two landing pads to contact the resistor sheet and separate the two landing pads from each other in order to protect the resistor sheet in a thin film resistor structure.
Regarding claim 16, Wakisaka discloses wherein peripheral portions of the sidewall spacers (Figure 3, reference 5) extend below the resistor sheet (Figure 3, reference 3).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17 and 18 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art does not disclose nor fairly suggest a resistor structure, comprising: wherein each landing pad comprises a barrier metal layer upon the resistor sheet and a dielectric hard mask layer over the barrier metal layer as described in claim 17 further incorporated into the independent claim 15 and in the context of its recited apparatus, along with its depending claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-14, 19 and 20 are allowed over the prior art of record.
Reasons for Allowance
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art does not disclose nor fairly suggest a method for forming a resistor structure, comprising: etching the spacer film layer to form sidewall spacers around the two landing pads; and etching away the exposed portion of the barrier metal layer between the two landing pads to form the resistor structure (claim 1) and a method for forming a resistor structure in a back-end-of-line process, comprising: etching to form a resistor stack from the resistor material layer, the barrier metal layer, and the hard mask layer; etching the hard mask layer to expose a portion of the barrier metal layer between two ends of the resistor stack; partially etching the exposed portion of the barrier metal layer to form two landing pads at the ends of the resistor stack ;applying a spacer film layer over the resistor stack; etching the spacer film layer to form sidewall spacers around the two landing pads; completely etching away the exposed portion of the barrier metal layer between the two landing pads to form the resistor structure; applying a capping layer over the resistor structure; forming a second dielectric layer upon the substrate and over the resistor structure; etching to form vias to the two landing pads; filling the vias with an electrically conductive material; and forming metal contacts over the vias (claim 19) as described in these independent claims and in the context of their recited processes, along with their depending claims.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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 MONICA D HARRISON whose telephone number is (571)272-1959. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7-4:30pm.
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, Joshua Benitez can be reached at 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.
/MONICA D HARRISON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815
mdh
August 14, 2026
Prosecution Insights