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 .
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 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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election without traverse of Invention II and Species C directed to Figs. 4A-4B (claims 10-17) in the reply filed on June 24th, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-9 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. The Examiner requests the Applicant to cancel claims 1-9 and 18-20 for future allowance since claims 1-9 and 18-20 recite different subject matter for device structure.
Claim Objections
Claims 11 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 11 recites “inside of the recess pattern” in line 3 and should be amended to “the inside of the recess pattern” for being consistent with limitation “the inside of the recess pattern” in line 12 of claim 10. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “one end” in line 8 and should be amended to “one end of the first through-hole via” for avoiding confusion. 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.
Claims 10-17 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “the inside of the recess pattern” in line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 11-17 are rejected for being depended on claim 10 and having the above issue incorporated into the claims.
Claim 12 recites “a second through-hole via” in line 3 without reciting a first through-hole via. It is unclear to the Examiner how the second through-hole existed within the method without forming the first through-hole via.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “the other end of the second through-hole via” in lines 6-7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the insulating material of the interlayer insulation layer” in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “the other end of the first through-hole via” in lines 9-10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites “exposing a part of the recess pattern by removing a part of the base insulating layer” in lines 4-5 and “removing the part of the recess pattern” in line 6. It is unclear to the examiner how to expose and remove the part of the recess pattern while the recess pattern no longer exists after filling the inside of the recess pattern with an insulation material as recited in line 12 of claim 10.
Claim 16 recites “the removing of the part of the recess pattern” in line 3. It is unclear to the examiner how to remove the part of the recess pattern while the recess pattern no longer exists after filling the inside of the recess pattern with an insulation material as recited in line 12 of claim 10.
Claim 17 recites “penetrates a bottom surface of the recess pattern and protrude into the recess pattern” in lines 3-4. It is unclear to the examiner how to determine the bottom surface of the recess pattern while the recess pattern no longer exists after filling the inside of the recess pattern with an insulation material as recited in line 12 of claim 10.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-17 will be allowed over prior art of record if amends to overcome the 112 rejections as set forth in the office action above.
The following is an examiner' s statement of reason for allowance: the prior art made of record does not teach or fairly suggest the following:
Regarding claim 10, Noh et al. (Pub. No.: 2024/0250135 A1) discloses a method of manufacturing a semiconductor device in Figs. 24A-29A, comprising: forming a channel layer (NSS), a first source/drain pattern (130 on the left), and a second source/drain pattern (130 on the right) arranged in a first direction (x-direction) on a first surface of a substrate (114); forming a gate structure (160), that extends in a second direction (y-direction) crossing the first direction on the first surface of the substrate, and surrounds the channel layer; forming an interlayer insulation layer (180) on the channel layer, the first source/drain pattern, the second source/drain pattern, and the gate structure (see [0153-0166]).
Hebert (Pub. No.: US 2010/0237416 A1) discloses a method comprising forming a first silicide layer (440) extending along a surface profile of the recess pattern (see Fig. 4A-5B and [0050-0063]).
However, the combination of Noh et al. and Hebert et al. fails to disclose a recess pattern that penetrates the first source/drain pattern in a third direction that is perpendicular to the first direction and the second direction and filling the inside of the recess pattern with an insulating material as recited in claim 10.
Claims 11-17 depend on claim 10, and therefore also include said claimed limitation.
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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CUONG B NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1509 (Email: CuongB.Nguyen@uspto.gov). The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30 AM-5:00 PM Eastern Standard Time.
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, Steven H. Loke can be reached on (571) 272-1657. 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.
/CUONG B NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Prosecution Insights