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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of group I, species I, claims 1-2, 5-7, 8-12 and 21-28, in the reply filed on June 18, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 4 and 8 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on June 18, 2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because i) Figs. 5A and 5B do not correspond to A1-A1 and B-B in Fig. 4, respectively (i.e. Fig. 4 shows that only one 38 on sidewalls of 30 and 38 is separated from 22’ by 32; however, Fig. 5A shows two 38 on sidewalls of 22’; and Fig. 5B shows 38 directly contacted 22’); ii) Fig. 10C do not correspond to Fig. 10B (i.e. Fig. 10B shows each 48 is covered by 50 and 52, and a sidewall of 48 is vertically aligned with a sidewall of 38; however, Fig. 10C shows 48 is separated from 38); iii) unlabeled shadings in Figs. 11A and 11B (i.e. shading above 34 in both Figs. 11A and 11B, shading above 52 and shading between 52 and 38 in Fig. 11B). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “22A” has been used to designate “first layers”, “semiconductor layers” and “sacrificial semiconductor layers”; reference character “48” has been used to designate “source/drain regions”, “epitaxial source/drain regions” and “epitaxy regions”; and reference character “L9” has been used to designate both “length” and “overlap distance”. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: “ab” should read “an” before “entire” ([0047], line 6, filed June 18, 2026).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2, 5-7, 8-12 and 21-28 are objected to because of the following informalities: a comma should be inserted after “method” (claims 1, 21 and 25, line 1); a comma should be inserted after claim number (claim 6 and 10); and a colon should be inserted after “comprising” (claim 6, line 1). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-2, 5-7, 8-12 and 21-28 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 limitation of “the plurality of gate stacks are on first portions of the plurality of semiconductor regions”, as recited in claim 1, is unclear as to whether said limitation is in one-to-one, multiple-to-one or one-to-multiple relationship between gate stack and first portion, and between first portion and semiconductor region applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “a plurality of openings in the plurality of gate stacks”, as recited in claim 1, is unclear as to whether said limitation is in one-to-one, multiple-to-one or one-to-multiple relationship between opening and gate stack applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “remaining portions of the dummy gate stacks”, as recited in claim 3, is unclear as to whether said limitation is in one-to-one, multiple-to-one or one-to-multiple relationship between remaining portion and gate stack applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “portions of the plurality of semiconductor regions”, as recited in claim 10, is unclear as to whether said limitation is the same as or different from “first portion of the plurality of semiconductor regions”, as recited in claim 1.
The claimed limitation of “portions of the plurality of semiconductor regions and the plurality of gate stacks form a plurality of transistors”, as recited in claim 10, is unclear as to portion(s) of which element(s) form a plurality of transistors applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “lengthwise directions of the first gate stack and the second gate stack”, as recited in claim 21, is unclear as to lengthwise direction(s) of which element applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “opposite sides of the first gate stack and the second gate stack”, as recited in claim 21, is unclear as to opposite sides of each or all of the first gate stack and the second gate stack applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of “a semiconductor region”, as recited in claim 23, is unclear as to whether said limitation is the same as or different from “a plurality of semiconductor regions”, as recited in claim 21.
The claimed limitations of “a first portion” and “a second portion”, as recited in claim 25, lines 5-6, is unclear as to whether said limitations are the same as or different from “a plurality of portions”, as recited in claim 25, line 2.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 25, 26 and 28, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lu et al. (2023/0114191).
As for claim 25, Lu et al. show in Figs. 1-5, 6A-8A, 6B-8B, 7C-8C, 9-20 and related text a method comprising:
forming an elongated semiconductor region 24 comprising a plurality of portions, wherein the elongated semiconductor region comprises a first semiconductor material (Fig. 3; [0013]);
forming a first gate stack 30 and a second gate stack 30 immediately neighboring each other (Fig. 3);
forming an epitaxy semiconductor region 42 between and contacting a first portion and a second portion of the elongated semiconductor region, wherein the epitaxy semiconductor region comprises a second semiconductor material different from the first semiconductor material (Fig. 5; [0020]);
forming a first dielectric isolation region 54 in the first gate stack (Fig. 7A-7C); and
forming a second dielectric isolation region 54 in the second gate stack, wherein both of the first dielectric isolation region and the second dielectric isolation region intersect the elongated semiconductor region (Fig. 7A-7C).
As for claim 26, Lu et al. show in a top view of the epitaxy semiconductor region, the epitaxy semiconductor region is surrounded by dielectric materials (Fig. 7A-7C; [0027]).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 27 and 28, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu et al. (2023/0114191).
As for claims 27 and 28, Lu et al. disclosed substantially the entire claimed invention, as applied to claim 25 above, except the first dielectric isolation region is longer than, and is narrower than, the second dielectric isolation region (claim 27); and the elongated semiconductor region comprises a nanostructure (claim 28).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the first dielectric isolation region being longer than, and is narrower than, the second dielectric isolation region and the elongated semiconductor region comprising a nanostructure, in order to reduce size and cost of the device. Furthermore, a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-12 and 21-23 are allowed.
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 “the first opening and the second opening are immediately neighboring each other and have a sideway overlap with an overlap distance equal to or greater than a pitch of the plurality of semiconductor regions, and wherein the overlap distance is parallel to the second lengthwise directions”, as recited in claim 1; and “the first fin isolation region and the second fin isolation region have a sideway overlap having an overlap distance being equal to or greater than a pitch of the plurality of semiconductor regions, and wherein the overlap distance is measured in a direction parallel to a lengthwise direction of each of the first gate stack and the second gate stack”, as recited in claim 21.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-12 and 21-23 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
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
Prosecution Insights