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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
1. Applicant's amendment of claims 1 and 2 in “Claims - 05/13/2026” with “Amendment/Req. Reconsideration-After Non-Final Reject - 05/13/2026”, have been acknowledged by Examiner.
This office action considers claims 1-15 pending for prosecution.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Notes: when present, semicolon separated fields within the parenthesis (; ;) represent, for example, as (100; Fig 3A; [0063]) = (element 100; Figure No. 3A; Paragraph No. [0063]). For brevity, the texts “Element”, “Figure No.” and “Paragraph No.” shall be excluded, though; additional clarification notes may be added within each field. The number of fields may be fewer or more than three indicated above. These conventions are used throughout this document.
2. Claims 1-11 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (US 20240222267 A1; hereinafter Lee).
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches a memory device (see the entire document, specifically Fig. 1; [0003+], and as cited below), comprising:
a first stack structure ({132, 134}; Fig. 5; [0047]) including conductive layers ({134}; Fig. 5; [0047]) stacked along a first direction, the first stack structure ({132, 134}; Fig. 5; [0047]) having a stepped structure defined by end portions of the conductive layers ({134}; Fig. 5; [0047]);
contact plugs ({170}; Fig. 5; [0052, 0065-0068]) respectively connected to the conductive layers ({134}; Fig. 5; [0047]), the contact plugs ({580: 575a, 560a}; Fig. 7E; [0115-0122, 0131-0134, 0145]) extending along the first direction, the contact plugs ({170}; Fig. 5; [0052, 0065-0068]) extending to the inside of the first stack structure ({132, 134}; Fig. 5; [0047]); and
dummy layers ({150D, 152D}; Figs. 5-6; [0052, 0056-0057, 0068]) interposed between the contact plugs ({170}; Fig. 5; [0052, 0065-0068]) and disposed over end portions of the conductive layers ({134}; Fig. 5; [0047]).
Regarding claim 2, Lee teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Lee further teaches wherein the dummy layers ({150D, 152D}; Figs. 5-6; [0052, 0056-0057, 0068]) are located over the stepped structure of the first stack structure ({132, 134}; Fig. 5; [0047]).
Regarding claim 3, Lee teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Lee further comprising first spacers ({152D}; Figs. 5-6; [0052, 0056-0057, 0068])alternately stacked with the dummy layers ({150D, 152D}; Figs. 5-6; [0052, 0056-0057, 0068]).
Regarding claim 4, Lee teaches all of the features of claim 3.
Lee further teaches wherein the dummy layers ({150D}; Figs. 5-6; [0052, 0056-0057, 0068]) and the first spacers ({152D}; Figs. 5-6; [0052, 0056-0057, 0068]) extend along the end portions of the conductive layers ({134}; Figs. 5-6; [0052, 0056-0057, 0068]), respectively.
Regarding claim 5, Lee teaches all of the features of claim 3.
Lee further teaches wherein the dummy layers ({150D}; Figs. 5-6; [0052, 0056-0057, 0068]) and the first spacers ({152D}; Figs. 5-6; [0052, 0056-0057, 0068]) constitute a second stack structure (see Figs. 5-6; [0052, 0056-0057, 0068) overlapping the stepped structure of the first stack structure ({132, 134}; Fig. 5; [0047]).
Regarding claim 6, Lee teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Lee further teaches wherein at least one dummy layer ({150D}; Figs. 5-6; [0052, 0056-0057, 0068]) among the dummy layers ({150D}; Figs. 5-6; [0052, 0056-0057, 0068]) has a stepped shape corresponding to the stepped structure (see Figs. 5-6; [0052, 0056-0057, 0068]).
Regarding claim 7, Lee teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Lee further teaches wherein the first stack ({132, 134}; Fig. 5; [0047]) further includes interlayer insulating layers ({132}; Fig. 5; [0047])stacked between the conductive layers ({134}; Fig. 5; [0047]).
Regarding claim 8, Lee teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Lee further teaches wherein the contact plugs ({170}; see Figs. 5-6; [0052, 0065-0068])) are spaced apart from the conductive layers ({134}; see Figs. 5-6; [0047]), respectively.
Regarding claim 9, Lee teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Lee further comprising second spacers ({172}; see Fig. 6; [0067-0068]) between the contact plugs ({170}; Fig. 5; [0052, 0065-0068]) and the conductive layers ({134}; see Figs. 5-6; [0047]).
Regarding claim 10, Lee teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Lee further comprising connection structures ({136}; Figs. 5-6; [0052-0054]) respectively in contact with top surfaces of the end portions of the conductive layers ({134}; Fig. 5; [0047]), wherein the contact plugs ({170}; Fig. 5; [0052, 0065-0068]) are in contact with the connection structures ({136}; Figs. 5-6; [0052-0054]), respectively.
Regarding claim 11, Lee teaches all of the features of claim 10.
Lee further teaches wherein the contact plugs ({170}; Fig. 5; [0052, 0065-0068]) are connected to the conductive layers ({134}; Fig. 5; [0047]) through the connection structures ({136}; Figs. 5-6; [0052-0054]).
Regarding claim 13, Lee teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Lee further teaches wherein the dummy layers ({150D, 152D}; Figs. 5-6; [0052, 0056-0057, 0068]) include a conductive material.
Regarding claim 14, Lee teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Lee further comprising third spacers ({140}; Fig. 5; [0053-0055, 0058]) located between the contact plugs ({170}; Fig. 5; [0052, 0065-0068]) and the dummy layers ({150D, 152D}; Figs. 5-6; [0052, 0056-0057, 0068]).
Regarding claim 15, Lee teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Lee further teaches wherein the contact plugs ({170}; Figs. 5-6; [0052, 0065-0068]) and the dummy layers ({150D, 152D}; Figs. 5-6; [0052, 0056-0057, 0068]) are electrically isolated from each other.
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 of this title, 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.
Notes: when present, semicolon separated fields within the parenthesis (; ;) represent, for example, as (30A; Fig 2B; [0128]) = (element 30A; Figure No. 2B; Paragraph No. [0128]). For brevity, the texts “Element”, “Figure No.” and “Paragraph No.” shall be excluded, though; additional clarification notes may be added within each field. The number of fields may be fewer or more than three indicated above. These conventions are used throughout this document.
3. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 20240222267 A1; hereinafter Lee), in view of the following statement.
Regarding claim 12, Lee teaches all of the features of claim 10.
Lee further teaches wherein each of the connection structures ({136}; Figs. 5-6; [0052-0054]) includes (see below for “a concave surface recessed from a side surface of”) the first stack structure ({132, 134}; Fig. 5; [0047]).
As noted above, Lee does not expressly disclose “wherein each of the connection structures includes a concave surface recessed from a side surface of the first stack structure”.
However, the Applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed “wherein each of the connection structures includes a concave surface recessed from a side surface of the first stack structure” is for a particular purpose that is critical to the overall claimed invention (i.e. the invention would not work without wherein each of the connection structures includes a concave surface recessed from a side surface of the first stack structure). Also, the Applicant has not shown that “wherein each of the connection structures includes a concave surface recessed from a side surface of the first stack structure” produces a result that was new or unexpected enough to patentably distinguish the claimed invention over the cited prior art. Therefore, no rationale is given that the invention will not function without “wherein each of the connection structures includes a concave surface recessed from a side surface of the first stack structure”. Thus, the claimed “wherein each of the connection structures includes a concave surface recessed from a side surface of the first stack structure” is not critical to the invention.
Examiner would like to note that MPEP §2144.04.IV(B) guideline, where change of shape is a Legal Precedent as Source of Supporting Rationale. See In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) (The court held that the configuration of the claimed disposable plastic nursing container was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant.).
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In view of the above, as there is no persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of “wherein each of the connection structures includes a concave surface recessed from a side surface of the first stack structure” is significant. Thus, the claimed limitation of “wherein each of the connection structures includes a concave surface recessed from a side surface of the first stack structure” is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious as per MPEP §2144.04.IV(B) guideline. Therefore, the claimed limitation of “wherein each of the connection structures includes a concave surface recessed from a side surface of the first stack structure” is not patentable over Lee.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed in the “Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment” on 05/13/2026 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive, because of the following: the Applicant's amendment of claim 1 necessitated the shift in new grounds of rejection detailed in sections above. The shift in grounds of rejection renders the Applicant's arguments moot.
Please see the analysis of rejection for claims above.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Omar Mojaddedi whose telephone number is 313-446-6582. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m..
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, Julio J. Maldonado, can be reached on 571-272-1864. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/OMAR F MOJADDEDI/Examiner, Art Unit 2898
Prosecution Insights