CTNF 18/659,659 CTNF 89877 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. 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. Claim 20 is 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 claim recites “a void greater less than”. It is not clear if the recited void is greater or less than the recited size. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1, 2, 4, 6 – 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Li et al. (US 2022/0285346) . Regarding claim 1 , Li teaches (FIG. 1, 12A, 12B, 21) : A semiconductor device comprising: an active pattern located on a substrate, the active pattern spaced apart from other active patterns in a first direction and extending in a second direction different from the first direction ([0018]) ; source/drain patterns (205S/D) located on the active pattern and each source/drain pattern spaced apart from one another in the second direction ([0018]) ; a channel pattern (205C) located between a first source/drain pattern and a second source/drain pattern of the source/drain patterns ([0018]) ; a gate pattern (254) extending between the adjacent source/drain patterns in the first direction and surrounding at least a portion of the channel pattern ([0028]) ; and an isolation structure (230) extending in the first direction, the isolation structure located outside the source/drain patterns in the second direction and extending into the active pattern in a third direction that is different from the first and second directions ([0035]) , wherein the isolation structure includes insulating patterns (204, 222, 402) stacked in the third direction, an interfacial layer (218, 404) located between adjacent insulating patterns, and an insulating liner surrounding the insulating patterns (216, 404) . Regarding claim 2 , Li teaches ([0022] – [0025]) : The semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein: the insulating pattern includes silicon nitride (SiN), silicon nitride oxide (SiON), silicon carbon nitride (SiCN), or a combination thereof. Regarding claim 4 , Li teaches ([0022] – [0025]) : The semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein: the interfacial layer includes silicon (Si) and nitrogen (N), and the interfacial layer further includes oxygen (O), carbon (C), or both oxygen (O) and carbon (C). Regarding claim 6 , Li teaches ([0023]) : The semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein: the insulating liner includes an insulating material that includes silicon nitride (SiN), silicon carbonitride (SiCN), or a combination thereof, and does not include oxygen (O). Regarding claim 7 , Li is silent with respect to any voids in the insulating stack, and therefore does not show any voids over 2 nm: The semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein: the isolation structure has a void less than 2 nm, and the isolation structure does not have a void in the range of 2 nm to 10 nm. Regarding claim 8 , Li teaches (FIG. 21) : The semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein: the isolation structure includes between 2 to 20 insulating patterns, and between 1 to 19 interfacial layers. Regarding claim 9 , Li teaches ([0022] – [0023]) : The semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein: a length of at least one insulating pattern in the third direction is 1 nm to 150 nm. Regarding claim 10 , Li teaches ([0022] – [0023]) : The semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein: a length of the insulating liner in the second direction is 2 nm to 5 nm. Regarding claim 11 , Li teaches: The semiconductor device of claim 1, further comprising: a first interlayer insulating layer (242) located on the substrate and covering the source/drain pattern; a gate capping pattern located on the gate pattern (214) ; and a second interlayer insulating layer (244) located on the first interlayer insulating layer and the gate capping pattern, wherein the isolation structure penetrates through the first interlayer insulating layer, the second interlayer insulating layer, the gate capping pattern, the gate pattern, the channel pattern, or a combination thereof, in the third direction (FIG. 11A, 11B) . Regarding claim 12 , Li teaches: A semiconductor device comprising: an active pattern located on a substrate, the active pattern spaced apart from other active patterns in a first direction and extending in a second direction different from the first direction ([0018]) ; source/drain patterns (205S/D) located on the active pattern and each source/drain pattern spaced apart from one another in the second direction ([0018]) ; a channel pattern (205C) located between a first source/drain pattern and a second source/drain pattern of the source/drain patterns ([0018]) ; a gate pattern (254) extending between the first source/drain pattern and the second source/drain pattern in the first direction and surrounding at least a portion of the channel pattern ([0028]) ; and an isolation structure (230) extending in the first direction, located outside the source/drain patterns in the second direction, and extending into the active pattern in a third direction that is different from the first and second directions (FIG. 21) , wherein the isolation structure includes insulating patterns stacked in the third direction, an interfacial layer (216, 404) located between the insulating patterns, an insulating liner (214) surrounding the insulating patterns, and an insulating spacer (218) located between the insulating patterns and the insulating liner. Regarding claim 13 , Li teaches (FIG. 21) : The semiconductor device of claim 12, wherein: the insulating spacer has a lower end portion located in a lower portion of the isolation structure and sidewall portions extending from the lower end portion in the third direction. Regarding claim 14 , Li teaches (FIG. 21) : The semiconductor device of claim 13, wherein: a first insulating pattern of the insulating patterns is located on the lower end portion of the insulating spacer, the first insulating pattern is located between the sidewall portions of the insulating spacer. Regarding claim 15 , Li teaches (FIG. 21) : The semiconductor device of claim 12, wherein: a length of a sidewall portion of the insulating spacer in the second direction decreases toward the third direction. Regarding claim 16 , Li teaches: A semiconductor device comprising: an active pattern located on a substrate, the active pattern spaced apart from other active patterns in a first direction and extending in a second direction different from the first direction ([0018]) ; source/drain patterns (205S/D) located on the active pattern and each source/drain pattern spaced apart from one another in the second direction ([0018]) ; a channel pattern (205C) located between a first source/drain pattern and a second source/drain pattern of the source/drain patterns ([0018]) ; a gate pattern (254) extending between the adjacent source/drain patterns in the first direction and surrounding at least a portion of the channel pattern ([0028]) ; and an isolation structure (230) extending in the first direction, the isolation structure located outside the source/drain patterns in the second direction, and extending into the active pattern in a third direction that is different from the first and second directions (FIG. 21) , wherein the isolation structure includes an insulating structure having a first portion (222) and a second portion (216) having different contents (atom %) of oxygen (O), carbon (C), or both oxygen (O) and carbon (C), and an insulating liner (214) surrounding the insulating structure. Regarding claim 17 , Li teaches ([0023]) : The semiconductor device of claim 16, wherein: the first portion and the second portion include silicon (Si) and nitrogen (N), and the first portion and the second portion further include oxygen (O), carbon (C), or both oxygen (O) and carbon (C). Regarding claim 20 , Li is silent with respect to any voids in the insulating stack, and therefore does not show any voids over 2 nm: The semiconductor device of claim 16, wherein: the isolation structure has a void greater less than 2 nm, and the isolation structure does not have a void in the range of 2 nm to 10 nm . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 3, 5, and 18 – 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (US 2022/0285346) . Regarding claim 3 , Li teaches varying the composition concentrations of the insulating layers, including layers free of oxygen ([0022] – [0023]), but fails to expressly disclose the complete concentration compositions: The semiconductor device of claim 2, wherein: the insulating pattern is formed of a material that has that has a concentration of, from 30 at% to 60 at% of the silicon (Si), from 30 at% to 60 at% of the nitrogen (N), from 0 at% to 5 at% of the oxygen (O), and from 0 at% to 50 at% of the carbon (C). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the various liners and interlayer materials of whatever elemental proportions were necessary or expedient to prevent degradation of device performance, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller , 105 USPQ 233. See also In re Hoeschele , 406 F.2d 1403, 160 USPQ 809 (CCPA 1969). For more recent cases applying this principle, see Merck & Co. Inc . v. Biocraft Laboratories Inc. , 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989), and In re Kulling , 897 F.2d 1147, 14 USPQ2d 1056 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See also MPEP § 716.07: “It is to be presumed also that skilled workers would as a matter of course, if they do not immediately obtain desired results, make certain experiments and adaptations, within the skill of the competent worker. The failures of experimenters who have no interest in succeeding should not be accorded great weight. In re Michalek , 162 F.2d 229, 232 (CCPA 1947); In re Reid, 179 F.2d 998, 1002 (CCPA 1950).” Regarding claim 5 , Li teaches varying the composition concentrations of the insulating layers, including layers free of oxygen ([0022] – [0023]), but fails to expressly disclose the complete concentration compositions: The semiconductor device of claim 4, wherein: the interfacial layer is formed of a material that has that has a concentration of from 20 at% to 60 at% of the silicon (Si), from 30 at% to 60 at% of the nitrogen (N), from between 0 to 20 at% of the oxygen (O), and from between 0 at% to 50 at% of the carbon (C). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the various liners and interlayer materials of whatever elemental proportions were necessary or expedient to prevent degradation of device performance, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller , 105 USPQ 233. See also In re Hoeschele , 406 F.2d 1403, 160 USPQ 809 (CCPA 1969). For more recent cases applying this principle, see Merck & Co. Inc . v. Biocraft Laboratories Inc. , 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989), and In re Kulling , 897 F.2d 1147, 14 USPQ2d 1056 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See also MPEP § 716.07: “It is to be presumed also that skilled workers would as a matter of course, if they do not immediately obtain desired results, make certain experiments and adaptations, within the skill of the competent worker. The failures of experimenters who have no interest in succeeding should not be accorded great weight. In re Michalek , 162 F.2d 229, 232 (CCPA 1947); In re Reid, 179 F.2d 998, 1002 (CCPA 1950).” Regarding claim 18 , Li teaches varying the composition concentrations of the insulating layers, including layers free of oxygen ([0022] – [0023]), but fails to expressly disclose the complete concentration compositions: The semiconductor device of claim 17, wherein: the first portion is formed of a material that has that has a concentration of from 30 at% to 60 at% of the silicon (Si), from 30 at% to 60 at% of the nitrogen (N), between 0 at% to 5 at% of the oxygen (O), and between 0 at% to 50 at% of the carbon (C). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the various liners and interlayer materials of whatever elemental proportions were necessary or expedient to prevent degradation of device performance, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller , 105 USPQ 233. See also In re Hoeschele , 406 F.2d 1403, 160 USPQ 809 (CCPA 1969). For more recent cases applying this principle, see Merck & Co. Inc . v. Biocraft Laboratories Inc. , 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989), and In re Kulling , 897 F.2d 1147, 14 USPQ2d 1056 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See also MPEP § 716.07: “It is to be presumed also that skilled workers would as a matter of course, if they do not immediately obtain desired results, make certain experiments and adaptations, within the skill of the competent worker. The failures of experimenters who have no interest in succeeding should not be accorded great weight. In re Michalek , 162 F.2d 229, 232 (CCPA 1947); In re Reid, 179 F.2d 998, 1002 (CCPA 1950).” Regarding claim 19 , Li teaches varying the composition concentrations of the insulating layers, including layers free of oxygen ([0022] – [0023]), but fails to expressly disclose the complete concentration compositions: The semiconductor device of claim 17, wherein: the second portion is formed of a material that has a concentration of from 20 at% to 60 at% of the silicon (Si), from 30 at% to 60 at% of the nitrogen (N), between 0 at% to 20 at% of the oxygen (O), and between 0 at% to 50 at% of the carbon (C). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the various liners and interlayer materials of whatever elemental proportions were necessary or expedient to prevent degradation of device performance, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller , 105 USPQ 233. See also In re Hoeschele , 406 F.2d 1403, 160 USPQ 809 (CCPA 1969). For more recent cases applying this principle, see Merck & Co. Inc . v. Biocraft Laboratories Inc. , 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989), and In re Kulling , 897 F.2d 1147, 14 USPQ2d 1056 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See also MPEP § 716.07: “It is to be presumed also that skilled workers would as a matter of course, if they do not immediately obtain desired results, make certain experiments and adaptations, within the skill of the competent worker. The failures of experimenters who have no interest in succeeding should not be accorded great weight. In re Michalek , 162 F.2d 229, 232 (CCPA 1947); In re Reid, 179 F.2d 998, 1002 (CCPA 1950).” Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CORY W ESKRIDGE whose telephone number is (571)272-0543. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 9 - 5. 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, Jerry O'Connor can be reached at (571) 272-6787. 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. /CORY W ESKRIDGE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3624 Application/Control Number: 18/659,659 Page 2 Art Unit: 3624 Application/Control Number: 18/659,659 Page 3 Art Unit: 3624 Application/Control Number: 18/659,659 Page 4 Art Unit: 3624 Application/Control Number: 18/659,659 Page 5 Art Unit: 3624 Application/Control Number: 18/659,659 Page 6 Art Unit: 3624 Application/Control Number: 18/659,659 Page 7 Art Unit: 3624 Application/Control Number: 18/659,659 Page 8 Art Unit: 3624 Application/Control Number: 18/659,659 Page 9 Art Unit: 3624 Application/Control Number: 18/659,659 Page 10 Art Unit: 3624 Application/Control Number: 18/659,659 Page 11 Art Unit: 3624
Prosecution Insights