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 .
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 1-11 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.
Regarding claim 1, it is unclear how the conductive contact is in direct contact with at least an upper portion of the second gate structure when it is disposed over the first gate structure but not over the second gate structure. Applicants own figures, specifically at least fig. 5 and 13 show a contact structure disposed over and in direct contact with one of the two gate structures shown [221 and 222, contact 243a is in direct contact with 221 while being over 221]. For the purposes of this rejection claim 1 will be interpreted as having a conductive contact which is disposed over the first gate structure but not the second gate structure… and a second bottom facing surface of the conductive contact is in direct contact with at least a portion of an upper surface of the first gate structure.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-9, 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Oosuka et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2009/0108379).
Regarding claim 1, Oosuka teaches a device, comprising:
a source/drain component disposed over a substrate in a cross-sectional side view [fig. 4a, 29a];
a first gate structure and a second gate structure each disposed over the substrate in the cross-sectional side view, wherein the first gate structure is separated from the second gate structure in a first horizontal direction in the cross-sectional side view [fig. 4a, first gate structure 42, second gate structure 22, separated horizontally] ; and
a conductive contact disposed over the source/drain component and over the first gate structure but not over the second gate structure in the cross-sectional side view, wherein a first bottom-facing surface of the conductive contact is in direct contact with the source/drain component, and wherein a second bottom-facing surface of the conductive contact is in direct contact with at least a portion of an upper surface of the first gate structure [fig. 4a, conductive contact 61 with first bottom facing surface in direct contact with source/drain component 29a and second bottom facing surface in direct contact with first gate structure 42].
Regarding claim 2, Oosuka discloses the device of claim 1, wherein:
the conductive contact has a first side surface and a second side surface facing the first gate structure in the cross-sectional side view [fig. 4a, first side surface below 43a, second side surface adjacent 43a];
the conductive contact has a third side surface facing the second gate structure in the cross-sectional side view [fig. 4a, third side surface facing 22];
the second side surface is disposed over the first side surface in the cross-sectional side view [fig. 4a, second side surface adjacent 43a over the first side surface]; and
the second side surface is more slanted than the first side surface in the first horizontal direction in the cross-sectional side view [fig. 4a, the second side surface adjacent 43a is more slanted than the first which is vertical, the second side surface follows an arc shape of 43a which would give it a slant depending on the points picked for reference].
Regarding claim 3, Oosuka teaches the device of claim 2, wherein the second side surface is more slanted than the third side surface in the first horizontal direction [fig. 4a, the third side surface facing 22 is vertical, the second side surface follows an arc shape of 43a which would give it a slant depending on the points picked for reference].
Regarding claim 4, Oosuka discloses the device of claim 2, wherein the second bottom facing surface is more vertically elevated than the first side surface in the cross sectional view [the second bottom surface in contact with gate electrode 42 is more vertically elevated than the first side surface which is below 43a].
Regarding claim 5, Oosuka teaches the device of claim 2, wherein:
The conductive contact has a fourth side surface that is opposite the third side surface in the cross sectional side view; and
The fourth side surface is disposed over the first gate structure [fig. 4a, the fourth side surface is above 42 and opposite the side surface facing 22].
Regarding claim 6, Oosuka discloses the device of claim 5, wherein the second side surface is more slanted in the first horizontal direction than the fourth side surface in the cross sectional view [the second side surface follows an arc shape of 43a which would give it a slant depending on the points picked for reference, the fourth side surface is vertical above 42].
Regarding claim 7, Oosuka teaches the device of claim 2, wherein a liner layer is disposed on the first side surface, the second side surface and the third side surface in the cross sectional view [fig. 4a, 67 covers the top of 61 including being above (on) the first side surface, the second side surface and the third side surface].
Regarding claim 8, Oosuka discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the first gate structure and the second gate structure extends in a second horizontal direction in a top view, the second horizontal direction being different from the first horizontal direction [fig. 4a, 42 and 22 extend in a first horizontal direction left to right as show in the cross section, they also extend in a second horizontal direction into the page as they are three dimensional structures and not flat boxes].
Regarding claim 9, Oosuka teaches the device of claim 1, wherein the source/drain component, the first gate structure, the second gate structure, and the conductive contact are components of a SRAM cell [paragraph [0071]].
Regarding claim 12, Oosuka discloses a device, comprising:
a source/drain disposed over an active region in a cross-sectional side view defined by a first horizontal direction and a vertical direction [fig. 4a, 29a];
a source/drain contact disposed over the source/drain in the cross-sectional side view, wherein the source/drain contact includes multiple side surfaces with different degrees of slant in the cross-sectional side view [fig. 4a, 61 over 29a and 42, different side surfaces adjacent 42, above and adjacent 43a, adjacent 22 and 23, having different degrees of slant]; and
a first gate and a second gate disposed on opposite sides of the source/drain contact in the cross-sectional side view [fig. 4a, 42 and 22], wherein the first gate and the source/drain are electrically coupled together by the source/drain contact, but the second gate is electrically isolated from the source/drain contact [fig. 4a, 42 is electrically coupled to 29a by 62 and 22 is isolated from 61].
Regarding claim 13, Oosuka teaches the device of claim 12, wherein at least one of the side surfaces of the source/drain contact is located over the first gate [fig. 4a, a side surface of 61 is over 42 on the left side of 61].
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.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oosuka as applied to claims 1-9, 12 and 13 above, and further in view of the following arguments.
Regarding claim 10, Oosuka fails to show the conductive contact has an L-like shape in a top view. However, this appears to be merely a change in shape of the contact layout and one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to this configuration through routine experimentation and optimization to achieve a desired transistor performance as the point at which one connects the gate and source/drain seems arbitrary. Applicant has not disclosed that the shape is for a particular unobvious purpose, produces an unexpected result, or is otherwise critical, see In re Daily, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). See also MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(B).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-20 are allowed.
Claim 14 is 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.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 USC 112 above but is believed to be allowable if said rejection is overcome and rewritten in independent form including all limitations of the base claim and any intervening claim.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 15, the prior art fails to disclose or suggest the device as claimed. Specifically, the prior art fails to teach the second segment of the conductive contact is located between the first gate structure and the second gate structure and overlaps with both the first active region and the second active region in the top view.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN M PARKER whose telephone number is (571)272-8794. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am - 3:30pm.
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, Zandra Smith can be reached at 571-272-2429. 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.
/JOHN M PARKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights