DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/23/2024 was filed after the mailing date of the application. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claims 1-15 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu, U.S. Pub. No. 20200395296.
Regarding claim 1, Lu discloses (Fig. 10):
An interconnect structure comprising:
a first insulating layer 105,
a first conductive line 106 embedded in the first insulating layer,
a second insulating layer 108 disposed on the first insulating layer,
a second conductive line 109 embedded in the second insulating layer, the second conductive line comprising a first portion, a second portion, and a third portion (Fig. 10),
a third insulating layer 112 disposed on the second insulating layer,
a third conductive line 113 embedded in the third insulating layer,
a first conductive via and second conductive via (the plurality of vias 110) embedded in the first insulating layer, the first conductive via connecting the first conductive line and the first portion, and the second conductive via connecting first conductive line and the second portion, and
a third conductive via and a fourth conductive via (the plurality of vias 114) embedded in the second insulating layer, the third conductive via connecting the first portion, and the second portion is substantially equal to a second cross-sectional area surrounded by the first portion, the third portion, the third conductive via, the fourth conductive via, and the third conductive line (Fig. 10).
Lu fails to disclose a first height between the first conductive line and the first portion is larger than a first distance between the first conductive via and the second conductive via.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the height and distance since the changes in size or dimension does not necessarily impart patentability where the change performs the same function in substantially the same way and does not produce an unexpected result. See In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 463. Moreover, the present application describes various embodiments in which the first height between the first conductive line and the first portion may be greater than, less than, or equal to the first distance between the first conductive via and the second conductive via, indicating that no particular dimensional relationship is critical.
Regarding claims 2-10, Lu fails to disclose the distance between vias and the height between conductive lines.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the height and distance since the changes in size or dimension does not necessarily impart patentability where the change performs the same function in substantially the same way and does not produce an unexpected result. See In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 463. Moreover, the present application describes various embodiments in which the first height between the first conductive line and the first portion may be greater than, less than, or equal to the first distance between the first conductive via and the second conductive via, indicating that no particular dimensional relationship is critical.
Regarding claim 11, Lu discloses wherein the second insulating layer has a part between a right side of the first portion and a left side of the second portion and in contact with the first insulating layer (Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 12, Lu discloses wherein the second insulating layer has a part between a left side of the first portion and a right side of the third portion and in contact with the first insulating layer (Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 13, Lu discloses wherein a lower surface of the third conductive line is substantially coplanar with an upper surface of the second insulating layer (Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 14, Lu discloses a lower surface of the first conductive line is substantially coplanar with a lower surface of the first insulating layer (Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 15, Lu discloses wherein a lower surface of the second conductive line is substantially coplanar with an upper surface of the first insulating layer (Fig. 10).
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al., U.S. Patent No. 10,032,713.
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses (Fig. 1J):
An interconnect structure comprising:
a first insulating layer 210,
a first conductive line (a lower-level conductive line 272) embedded in the first insulating layer,
a second insulating layer 240 disposed on the first insulating layer,
a second conductive line (an intermediate-level conductive line 272) embedded in the second insulating layer, the second conductive line comprising a first portion, a second portion, and a third portion (Fig. 1I-1R),
a third insulating layer 270 disposed on the second insulating layer,
a third conductive line (an upper-level conductive line 272) embedded in the third insulating layer,
a first conductive via and second conductive via (the first via 282 and the second via 282 that laterally spaced from the first via, both first and second vias are between the lower and intermediate conductive lines 272) embedded in the first insulating layer, the first conductive via connecting the first conductive line and the first portion, and the second conductive via connecting first conductive line and the second portion, and
a third conductive via and a fourth conductive via (the third vias 282 and fourth via 282 that laterally spaced from the third via, both third and fourth vias are in between the intermediate and upper conductive lines 272) embedded in the second insulating layer, the third conductive via connecting the first portion, and the second portion is substantially equal to a second cross-sectional area surrounded by the first portion, the third portion, the third conductive via, the fourth conductive via, and the third conductive line (Fig. 1I-1R).
Wang fails to disclose a first height between the first conductive line and the first portion is larger than a first distance between the first conductive via and the second conductive via.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the height and distance since the changes in size or dimension does not necessarily impart patentability where the change performs the same function in substantially the same way and does not produce an unexpected result. See In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 463. Moreover, the present application describes various embodiments in which the first height between the first conductive line and the first portion may be greater than, less than, or equal to the first distance between the first conductive via and the second conductive via, indicating that no particular dimensional relationship is critical.
Regarding claims 2-10, Wang fails to disclose the distance between vias and the height between conductive lines.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the height and distance since the changes in size or dimension does not necessarily impart patentability where the change performs the same function in substantially the same way and does not produce an unexpected result. See In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 463. Moreover, the present application describes various embodiments in which the first height between the first conductive line and the first portion may be greater than, less than, or equal to the first distance between the first conductive via and the second conductive via, indicating that no particular dimensional relationship is critical.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THAO P LE whose telephone number is (571)272-1785. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9AM-6PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jeff Natalini can be reached on 571-272-2266. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 703-872-9306.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/THAO P LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Prosecution Insights