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.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of updating the first paragraph of the Specification with US Patent No. 12,068,168 issued from the parent application.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15 and 17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 1, 1, 3, 4, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 16 of US Patent No. 12,068,168, respectively. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patented claims are generally directed to processes that are fully encompassed by the more broadly recited process claims of the instant application.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-17 would be allowable if the double patenting rejections as set forth in this Office Action are overcome and if they are rewritten or amended to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 1, the closest cited prior art, Huang et al. (US11676821), discloses a method (abstract) comprising: forming a first etching mask to cover a mandrel, a first spacer, and a second spacer (photomask 162 reads on a first etching mask, lines 60-62, column 10; and Fig. 14); patterning the first etching mask, wherein after the patterning, the first etching mask comprises: a first portion and a second portion having elongated top-view shapes (lines 5-19, column 11; and Fig. 15); a and a bridge portion connecting the first portion to the second portion (lines 5-19, column 11; and Fig. 15); performing a first etching process on the mandrel, wherein a portion of the mandrel directly underlying the bridge portion remains as a second bridge portion (lines 20-25, column 11 and Fig. 16). However, Huang fails to disclose or suggest performing a second etching process to laterally recess the second bridge portion of the mandrel. None of the cited prior art of record, taken either alone or in combination, discloses or renders obvious a method comprising the missing limitations in the context of the instant claim.
Regarding claims 2-12 and 16-17, they are dependent from claim 1.
Regarding claim 13, the closest cited prior art, Huang et al. (US11676821), discloses a method (abstract) comprising: forming a first spacer and a second spacer and a mandrel between the first spacer and the second spacer (lines 16-25, column 10; and Fig. 13); forming an etching mask (lines 5-19, column 11; and Fig. 15) comprising: a first portion overlapping the first spacer (lines 5-19, column 11; and Fig. 15); a second portion overlapping the second spacer (lines 5-19, column 11; and Fig. 15); and a first bridge portion overlapping the mandrel (lines 5-19, column 11; and Fig. 15); and etching the mandrel using the etching mask to define a pattern for the mandrel, wherein after the mandrel is etched, a remaining portion of the mandrel directly overlapped by the first bridge portion forms a second bridge portion (lines 20-31, column 11 and Fig. 16). However, Huang fails to disclose or suggest and laterally recessing the second bridge portion, wherein the first spacer and the second spacer are laterally recessed less than the second bridge portion. None of the cited prior art of record, taken either alone or in combination, discloses or renders obvious a method comprising the missing limitations in the context of the instant claim.
Regarding claims 14-15, they are dependent from claim 13.
Claims 18-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 18, the closest cited prior art, Huang et al. (US11676821), discloses a method (abstract) comprising: forming a first spacer and a second spacer parallel to each other, wherein the first spacer and the second spacer have a first distance from each other (lines 16-25, column 10; and Fig. 13); forming a mandrel comprising a bridging portion between the first spacer and the second spacer, wherein the bridging portion comprises first opposing sidewalls physically contacting the first spacer and the second spacer (lines 20-25, column 11 and Fig. 16); etching a dielectric layer underlying the mandrel to form trenches in the dielectric layer, wherein patterns of the first spacer, the second spacer, and the bridge portion of the mandrel collectively define sizes and patterns of the trenches (lines 27-41, column 12 and Fig. 23); and filling the trenches with a conductive material to form a first metal line and a second metal line (lines 42-44, column 12 and Fig. 24). However, Huang fails to disclose or suggest laterally recessing second opposing sidewalls of the mandrel, wherein during the laterally recessing, sidewalls of the first spacer and the second spacer are exposed to a respective etching chemical used for the lateral recessing, and wherein after the laterally recessing, the first spacer and the second spacer have a second distance equal to the first distance. None of the cited prior art of record, taken either alone or in combination, discloses or renders obvious a method comprising the missing limitations in the context of the instant claim.
Regarding claims 19-20, they are dependent from claim 18.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIONG-PING LU whose telephone number is (571) 270-1135. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 9:00am – 5:00pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joshua L Allen, can be reached at telephone number (571)270-3176. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/JIONG-PING LU/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713
Prosecution Insights