CTNF 18/545,419 CTNF 83053 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 08-25 AIA Applicant's election with traverse of species II, claims 21-40 , in the reply filed on April 2, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “the search and examination of all the claims may be made without serious burden” . This is not found persuasive because examining three distinct and separated inventions imposes serious burden on the examiner due to the uniqueness of each invention . The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on December 19, 2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Specification 07-29 AIA The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: “to10” should read “to 10” ([0077], line 2) . Appropriate correction is required. 06-31 AIA The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 21-40 are objected to because of the following informalities: “a” should be inserted before “semiconductor” (claims 21 and 33, line 1); and “word line” should read “word lines” (claims 21 (line 7) and 33 (line 8)) . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 21-40 are 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. The claimed limitations of "each of the plurality of dummy active regions has a second maximum width greater than a first maximum width in the short axis direction", as recited in claim 21, are unclear as to i) a first maximum width of which element applicant refers; ii) which element in the short axis direction applicant refers and iii) whether “a first maximum width” is the same as or different from “a first width”, as recited in claim 1, line 17. The claimed limitation of "the plurality of spacer patterns covering sidewalls of the plurality of base structures", as recited in claim 22, is unclear as to whether said limitation is in one-to-one, one-to-multiple or multiple-to-one between “spacer pattern” and “sidewall”, and between “sidewall” and “base structure” applicant refers. The claimed limitation of "a plurality of sidewall recesses on (all of) sidewalls of the plurality of dummy active regions", as recited in claims 23 and 28, is unclear as to whether said limitation is in one-to-one, one-to-multiple or multiple-to-one between “sidewall recesses” and “sidewall”, and between “sidewall” and “dummy active regions” applicant refers. The claimed limitation of "at least one of the plurality of dummy active regions defines a plurality of sidewall recesses on sidewalls of the plurality of dummy active regions", as recited in claim 23, is unclear as to what applicant means. 07-34-05 AIA Claim 26 recites the limitation " the sidewalls of the at least one of the plurality of dummy active region " in line 2 . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claimed limitation of "the plurality of sidewall recesses are on the sidewalls of the at least one of the plurality of dummy active regions apart from each other with a second length in the long axis direction", as recited in claims 26 and 36, is unclear as to which element apart from each other with a second length in the long axis direction applicant refers. 07-34-03 AIA The term " substantially " in claim s 27 and 36 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term " substantially " 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. The claimed limitation of "sidewalls", as recited in claim 29, is unclear as to whether said limitation is the same as or different from "sidewalls", as recited in claim 23. The claimed limitation of "sidewalls of a portion", as recited in claim 29, line 4, is unclear as to sidewalls of a portion of which element applicant refers. The claimed limitation of "a plurality of sidewall recesses on sidewalls of the at least one of the plurality of dummy active regions", as recited in claim 33, is unclear as to whether said limitation is in one-to-one, one-to-multiple or multiple-to-one between “sidewall recesses” and “sidewall” applicant refers. Claim 34 recites the limitation "the at least one second base structures" in lines 7-8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Also, it is unclear as to whether said limitation is the same as or different from “at least one second base structure”, as recited in claim 34, lines 5-6. The claimed limitation of "the plurality of spacer patterns covering sidewalls of the plurality of first base structures and sidewalls of the at least one second base structure", as recited in claim 34, is unclear as to whether said limitation is in one-to-one, one-to-multiple or multiple-to-one between “spacer pattern” and “sidewall”, and between “sidewall” and “first base structure” applicant refers. The claimed limitation of "at least two of the plurality of dummy active regions", as recited in claim 35, is unclear as to whether said limitation is the same as or different from “at least one of the plurality of dummy active regions”, as recited in claim 33. The claimed limitation of "the sidewalls of a portion", as recited in claim 40, is unclear as to whether said limitation is the same as or different from "sidewalls of the at least one of the plurality of dummy active regions", as recited in claim 33 . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-07 AIA 07-97 12-51-07 Claim s 21-40 are allowed. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record does not teach or suggest, singularly or in combination, at least the limitations of “each of the plurality of dummy active regions has a second maximum width greater than a first maximum width of each of the plurality of active regions in the short axis direction”, as recited in claim 21; and “the plurality of dummy active regions repeat with a second pitch twice the first pitch in the short axis direction”, as recited in claim 33 . 07-43-01 AIA Claim s 21-40 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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. Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ref's A-F are cited as being related to a method of manufacturing a semiconductor memory structure . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEIYA LI whose telephone number is (571)270-1572. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7AM-3PM. 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, LYNNE GURLEY can be reached at (571)272-1670. 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. /MEIYA LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2811 Application/Control Number: 18/545,419 Page 2 Art Unit: 2811 Application/Control Number: 18/545,419 Page 3 Art Unit: 2811 Application/Control Number: 18/545,419 Page 4 Art Unit: 2811 Application/Control Number: 18/545,419 Page 5 Art Unit: 2811 Application/Control Number: 18/545,419 Page 6 Art Unit: 2811 Application/Control Number: 18/545,419 Page 7 Art Unit: 2811
Prosecution Insights