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.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendment to the claims, filed on February 23rd, 2026, is acknowledged. Entry of amendment is accepted and made of record.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election without traverse of Species III directed to Fig. 1E (claims 1-20) in the reply filed on February 23rd, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by OH et al. (Pub. No.: US 2013/0244392 A1), hereinafter as OH.
Regarding claim 1, OH discloses a structure in Figs. 25-26 and 5-6, comprising: first and second fin structures (left and right fin F1) on a substrate (substrate 100) and separated by a first distance (distance of trench 102) (see Fig. 26, 6 and [0050], [0069-0070]); and third and fourth fin structures (left and right fin F3) on the substrate and separated by a second distance (distance between fins F3) greater than the first distance (distance between Fins F3 is greater than the distance of trench 102 due to the top portion of Fins F3 get further away after being etched) (see Fig. 26 and [0068-0070]), wherein: the third and fourth fin structures comprise shoulder structures having surfaces parallel to a top surface of the substrate (fins F3 has shoulders) (see Fig. 26); and a width of top surfaces of the first and second fin structures (width T1) is greater than a width of top surfaces of the third and fourth fin structures (width T3) (see Fig. 26 and [0070]).
Regarding claim 2, OH discloses the structure of claim 1, wherein each of the first, second, third, and fourth fin structures has a cross section with a tapered shape (lower portions of Fins F1 and F3 have tapered shape) (see Fig. 26).
Claims 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by HU et al. (Pub. No.: US 2014/0077331 A1), hereinafter as HU.
Regarding claim 15, HU discloses a structure in Fig. 1A-1B, comprising: a first fin
PNG
media_image1.png
729
1066
media_image1.png
Greyscale
structure (a fin 108 in annotated Fig. 1A above) on a substrate (substrate 101) (see annotated Fig. 1A above and [0017-0019]); a second fin structure (adjacent fin 108 in annotated Fig. 1A above) on the substrate and adjacent to the first fin structure, wherein the second fin structure is separated from the first fin structure by a first distance (horizontal spacing between two adjacent fins 108 as shown in annotated Fig. 1A above) in a first direction (horizontal direction); a third fin structure (another adjacent fin 108 in annotated Fig. 1A above) on the substrate and adjacent to the first fin structure, wherein the third fin structure is separated from the first fin structure by a second distance (vertical spacing between two adjacent fins 108 as shown in annotated Fig. 1A above) in a second direction (vertical direction); a fourth fin structure (a fin 104 in annotated Fig. 1A above) on the substrate; a fifth fin structure (adjacent fin 108 in annotated Fig. 1A above) on the substrate and adjacent to the fourth fin structure, wherein the fifth fin structure is separated from the fourth fin structure by a third distance (horizontal spacing between fin 104 and fin 108 as shown in annotated Fig. 1A above) in the first direction, and wherein the third distance is greater than the first distance (see annotated Fig. 1A above); and a sixth fin structure (another fin 104 in annotated Fig. 1A above) on the substrate and adjacent to the fourth fin structure, wherein the six fin structure is separated from the fourth fin structure by a fourth distance (vertical spacing between two adjacent fins 104 see illustrated fourth distance in annotated Fig. 1A above) in the second direction, and wherein the fourth distance is greater than the second distance (see Annotated Fig. 1A above and [0017-0021).
Regarding claim 16, OH discloses the structure of claim 15, wherein the first, second, and third fin structures are disposed on a first region of the substrate (top right corner of layer out in Fig. 1A), wherein the fourth, fifth, and sixth fin structures are disposed on a second region of the substrate (fin area 106 and 1 fin 108), and wherein a density of fins on the first region is greater than a density of fins on the second region (see annotated Fig. 1A above).
Regarding claim 17, HU discloses the structure of claim 15, wherein each of the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth fin structures comprises a base portion (n-well 105 and n-well 109) and a channel layer (fin areas 108 and 104) on the base portion, and wherein the base portion and the channel layer comprise different materials (n-well being doped and fin areas 108 and 104 not doped) (see Fig. 1B and [0019-0020]).
Regarding claim 18, HU discloses the structure of claim 15, wherein each of the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth fin structures comprises a base portion and a channel layer on the base portion, and wherein a width of the base portion is greater than a width of the channel layer (see Fig. 1B).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
a. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
b. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
c. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
d. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-7 and 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OH et al. (Pub. No.: US 2013/0244392 A1), hereinafter as OH in view of Liaw (Pub No.: US 2016/0155670 A1).
Regarding claim 1, OH discloses a structure in Figs. 1A-1C, comprising: first and second fin structures (two adjacent fins 22A) on a substrate (substrate 16) and separated by a first distance (spacing S1) (see Fig. 1C and [0014]); and third and fourth fin structures (two adjacent fins 22C) on the substrate and separated by a second distance (spacing S3) greater than the first distance (S3 > S1) wherein: and a width of top surfaces of the first and second fin structures (width W-1) is greater than a width of top surfaces of the third and fourth fin structures (width W3) see Figs. 1B-1C and [0013-0015].
OH fails to disclose the third and fourth fin structures comprise shoulder structures having surfaces parallel to a top surface of the substrate.
Liaw discloses a structure comprising a first, second, third and fourth fin structures (four fin 604A) comprising shoulder structures (shoulder at second-stage fin regions 904) having surfaces parallel to a top surface of a substrate (substrate 202) (see Figs. 10, 12 and [0021-0025]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the first, second, third and fourth fin structures of OH to have a shoulder structure having surfaces parallel to a top surface of the substrate as same as the structure of Liaw because the modified structure would improve gate control by increasing gate channel coupling, reduce off-state current and reduce short channel effects.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of OH and Liaw discloses the structure of claim 1, wherein each of the first, second, third, and fourth fin structures has a cross section with a tapered shape (see Figs. 1B-1C of OH).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of OH and Liaw discloses the structure of claim 1, wherein the first and second fin structures comprise shoulder structures having surfaces parallel to the top surface of the substrate (see the rejection of claim 1 abov3 and Figs. 10, 12 of Liaw).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of OH and Liaw discloses the structure of claim 3, wherein a width of the surfaces of the shoulder structures of the first and second fin structures is less than a width of the surfaces of the shoulder structures of the third and fourth fin structures (the width of fins 22C is less than the width of fins 22A so when being modified to have the shoulders, the width of the shoulder of fins 22C will be less than the width of the shoulder of fins 22A) (see Figs. 1B-1C of OH and Fig. 12 of Liaw).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of OH and Liaw discloses the structure of claim 4, but fails to disclose wherein the width of the surfaces of the shoulder structures of the first and second fin structures is between about 0.1 nm and about 1.0 nm, and wherein the width of the surfaces of the shoulder structures of the third and fourth fin structures is between about 0.2 nm and about 0.8 nm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the structure having the width of the surfaces of the shoulder structures of the first and second fin structures is between about 0.1 nm and about 1.0 nm, and wherein the width of the surfaces of the shoulder structures of the third and fourth fin structures is between about 0.2 nm and about 0.8 nm because these dimensions can be controlled to form nano-size fin transistor. Since it has been held that wherein the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering optimum or workable ranges involve only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233
Regarding claim 6, the combination of OH and Liaw discloses the structure of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the first distance is between about 25 nm and about 70 nm, and wherein the second distance is between about 70 nm and about 250 nm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the structure having wherein the first distance is between about 25 nm and about 70 nm, and wherein the second distance is between about 70 nm and about 250 nm because these dimensions can be controlled to form nano-size fin transistor. Since it has been held that wherein the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering optimum or workable ranges involve only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233
Regarding claim 7, the combination of OH and Liaw discloses the structure of claim 1, wherein a ratio of the second distance to the first distance is between 1 and about 15 (spacing S1 equals to 30nm and spacing S3 equals to 10nm) (see [0014]).
Regarding claim 9, OH discloses a structure in Figs. 1A-1C, comprising: a first fin structure (left fin 22A) on a substrate (substrate 16) and comprising: a first channel layer (channel layer of left fin 22A) (see [0012-0014]); a second fin structure (right fin 22A) on the substrate and adjacent to the first fin structure, wherein the second fin structure is separated from the first fin structure by a first distance (spacing S1), and wherein the second fin structure comprises: a second channel layer (channel layer of right fin 22A) (see Fig. 1B and [0014]); a third fin structure (left fin 22C) on the substrate and comprising: a third channel layer (channel layer of left fin 22C) (see Fig. 1C and
PNG
media_image2.png
388
912
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[0014]); and a fourth fin structure (right fin 22C) on the substrate and adjacent to the third fin structure, wherein the fourth fin structure is separated from the third fin structure by a second distance (spacing S-3) greater than the first distance, and wherein the fourth fin structure comprises a fourth channel layer (channel layer of right fin 22C), wherein each of the first, second, third and fourth channel layers comprises a stack of semiconductor layers (alternating of silicon and silicon germanium) (see [0012]).
OH fails to disclose the first fin structure having a first base and that the first channel on the first base, the second fin structure having a second base and that the second channel layer on the second base layer, the third fin structure having a third base layer and that the third channel layer on the third base layer; the fourth fin structure having a fourth base layer and that the fourth channel layer on the fourth base layer.
Liaw discloses a structure comprising a first, second, third and fourth fin structures (four fin 604A) comprising the first fin structure having a first base (first fin region 904) and that a first channel (first fin region 602) on the first base, the second fin structure having a second base (second fin region 904) and that a second channel layer (second fin region 602) on the second base layer, the third fin structure having a third base layer (third fin region 904) and that a third channel layer (third fin region 602) on the third base layer; the fourth fin structure having a fourth base layer (fourth fin region 904) and that a fourth channel layer (fourth fin region 602) on the fourth base layer (see Figs. 10, 12 and [0021-0025]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the first, second, third and fourth fin structures of OH to have the first base, second base, third base and fourth base for having each channel layers forming on the first, second, third and fourth bases as same as Liaw’ s structure because the modified structure would improve gate control by increasing gate channel coupling, reduce off-state current and reduce short channel effects.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of OH and Liaw discloses the structure of claim 1, wherein a ratio of the second distance to the first distance is between 1 and about 15 (spacing S1 equals to 30nm and spacing S3 equals to 10nm) (see [0014]).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of OH and Liaw discloses the structure of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein a germanium atomic percentage of the first, second, third and fourth channel layers is between about 0 % and about 40 %.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the structure comprising a germanium atomic percentage of the first, second, third and fourth channel layers is between about 0 % and about 40 % because the germanium content can be controlled through manufacturing for controlling the defects and performance of the transistor. Since it has been held that wherein the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering optimum or workable ranges involve only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233
Regarding claim 12, the combination of OH and Liaw discloses the structure of claim 1, after the first, second, third and fourth fin structure of OH being modified to have the base and wherein each of the first, second, third and fourth base layers comprises a shoulder structure (see Liaw and Fig. 12).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of OH and Liaw discloses the structure of claim 9, wherein the stack of semiconductor layers comprises first (Si) and second semiconductor layers (SiGe) stacked in an alternating configuration (see OH and [0013]).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of OH and Liaw discloses the structure of claim 9, wherein the stack of semiconductor layers comprises first and second semiconductor layers, and wherein the first and second semiconductor layers comprise different materials (Si and SiGe) (see OH and [0013]).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HU et al. (Pub. No.: US 2014/0077331 A1), hereinafter as HU, as applied to claim 20 and in view of Liaw (Pub No.: US 2016/0155670 A1).
Regarding claim 20, HU discloses the structure of claim 15, but fails to disclose wherein each of the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth fin structures comprises a shoulder structure, and wherein the shoulder structure comprises a surface parallel to a top surface of the substrate.
Liaw discloses a structure comprising fin structures (four fin 604A) comprising shoulder structures (shoulder at second-stage fin regions 904) having surfaces parallel to a top surface of a substrate (substrate 202) (see Figs. 10, 12 and [0021-0025]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the first, second, third, fourth, firth and sixth fin structures of HU to have a shoulder structure having surfaces parallel to a top surface of the substrate as same as the structure of Liaw because the modified structure would improve gate control by increasing gate channel coupling, reduce off-state current and reduce short channel effects.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 19 are 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.
The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The cited art, whether taken singularly or in combination, especially when all limitations are considered within the claimed specific combination, fails to disclose or suggest the claimed invention having: further comprising a dielectric layer between the third and fourth fin structures and below the surfaces of the shoulder structures as recited in claim 8 and wherein a width of top surfaces of the first, second, and third fin structures is greater than a width of top surfaces of the fourth, fifth, and sixth fin structures as recited in claim 19.
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