DETAILED ACTION
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 § 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.
Claims 1, 5, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 2020/0075342) (hereafter Chen).
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses a device comprising:
a semiconductor fin 22 (Fig. 8A, paragraph 0015) over a substrate 20 (Fig. 8A, paragraph 0022);
an isolation layer 24b (Fig. 8A, paragraph 0026) over the substrate 20 (Fig. 8A) and adjacent the semiconductor fin 22 (Fig. 8A);
a dielectric fin structure 26a (Fig. 8A, paragraph 0032) over the isolation layer 24b (Fig. 8A) and comprising:
a bottom dielectric fin (bottom portion of 26a in Fig. 8A), wherein the isolation layer 24b (Fig. 8A) surrounds a bottom of the bottom dielectric fin (bottom portion of 26a in Fig. 8A); and
a top dielectric fin (top portion of 26a in Fig. 8A) over the bottom dielectric fin (bottom portion of 26a in Fig. 8A) and spaced apart from the isolation layer 24b (Fig. 8A); and
a gate structure (60, 62, 64, and 66 in Fig. 8A) across the semiconductor fin 22 (Fig. 8A) and the dielectric fin structure 26a (Fig. 8A), wherein a portion of the gate structure (60, 62, 64, and 66 in Fig. 8A) in contact with the isolation layer 24b (Fig. 8A) has a first width.
Chen does not explicitly disclose the another portion of the gate structure in contact with the top dielectric fin has a second width greater than the first width.
Regarding the limitation, “another portion of the gate structure in contact with the top dielectric fin has a second width greater than the first width”, Chen discloses a portion of the gate structure (60, 62, 64, and 66 in Fig. 8A) in contact with the isolation layer 24b (Fig. 8A) has a first width W3 (Fig. 3, paragraph 0026, wherein “equal to or greater than half of the first width W1 but less than the first width W1”; see paragraph 0017, wherein W1 is in range from about 10 nm to about 20 nm; Therefore, W3 is in range from about 5 nm to about 10 nm), and another portion of the gate structure (60, 62, 64, and 66 in Fig. 8A) in contact with the top dielectric fin (top portion of 26a in Fig. 8A) has a second width (see W2 in Fig. 1A, paragraph 0017, wherein “range from about 40 nm to about 200 nm”; W3 (as shown in the above) is in range from about 5 nm to about 10 nm; Therefore, second width, which is W2 – 2W3, is in range from about 20 nm to about 190 nm) greater than the first width (W3 (as shown in the above) is in range from about 5 nm to about 10 nm).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Chen to form the another portion of the gate structure in contact with the top dielectric fin has a second width greater than the first width, since trenches (Chen, paragraph 0017) can have various widths between neighboring device fins 22 (Chen, Fig. 8A, paragraph 0017), which can be in any configuration or pattern of widths. In addition, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Note that the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed ranges or any unexpected results arising therefrom. Where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen dimensions or upon another variable recited in a claim, the applicant must show that the chosen dimensions are critical. In re Woodruff, 919 f.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 5, Chen further discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the bottom dielectric fin (bottom portion of 26a in Fig. 8A) has a seam 30 (Fig. 8A, paragraph 0025) therein, and the top dielectric fin (top portion of 26a in Fig. 8A) covers the seam 30 (Fig. 8A) of the bottom dielectric fin (bottom portion of 26a in Fig. 8A).
Regarding claim 6, Chen further discloses the device of claim 5, wherein a top surface of the bottom dielectric fin (bottom portion of 26a in Fig. 8A) comprises two convex portions (see sidewalls of 30 in Fig. 8A) on opposite sides of the seam 30 (Fig. 8A).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hsu et al. (US 2020/0091311) (hereafter Hsu).
Regarding claim 2, Chen discloses the device of claim 1, however Chen does not disclose a carbon concentration of the bottom dielectric fin is greater than a carbon concentration of the top dielectric fin.
Hsu discloses a carbon concentration of the bottom dielectric fin 122 (Fig. 1E, paragraph 0054, wherein “silicon carbon oxynitride”) is greater than a carbon concentration of the top dielectric fin 124 (Fig. 1E, paragraph 0054, wherein “silicon nitride”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Chen to form a carbon concentration of the bottom dielectric fin is greater than a carbon concentration of the top dielectric fin, as taught by Hsu, since applicant has not disclosed that the claimed material is for a particular unobvious purpose, produces an unexpected result, or is otherwise critical, which are criteria that have been held to be necessary for material limitations to be prima facie unobvious. The claimed material is considered to be a "preferred" or "optimum" material out of a plurality of well known materials that a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have found obvious to provide to the invention of the cited prior art reference, using routine experimentation and optimization of the invention. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jun et al. (US 2018/0047634) (hereafter Jun).
Regarding claim 3, Chen discloses the device of claim 1, however Chen does not disclose a top surface of the top dielectric fin is rounded.
Jun discloses a top surface of the top dielectric fin 89 (Fig. 26A, paragraph 0041) is rounded.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Chen to form a top surface of the top dielectric fin is rounded, as taught by Jun, since the upper insulating patterns 88 and 89 (Jun, Fig. 26A, paragraph 0044) and the gate structures GS (Jun, Fig. 26A, paragraph 0044) may play a role in preventing electrical shorts from occurring between the contact structures and conductive patterns disposed adjacent thereto.
Regarding claim 4, Chen in view of Jun discloses the device of claim 3, however Chen does not disclose the top surface of the top dielectric fin is rounder than a top surface of the semiconductor fin.
Jun discloses the top surface of the top dielectric fin 89 (Fig. 26A, paragraph 0041) is rounder than a top surface of the semiconductor fin 18a (Fig. 26A, paragraph 0071).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Chen to form the top surface of the top dielectric fin is rounder than a top surface of the semiconductor fin, as taught by Jun, since the upper insulating patterns 88 and 89 (Jun, Fig. 26A, paragraph 0044) and the gate structures GS (Jun, Fig. 26A, paragraph 0044) may play a role in preventing electrical shorts from occurring between the contact structures and conductive patterns disposed adjacent thereto.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jo et al. (US 2019/0305099) (hereafter Jo).
Regarding claim 7, Chen discloses the device of claim 1, however Chen does not disclose the bottom of the bottom dielectric fin tapers downward, and a top of the bottom dielectric fin tapers upward.
Jo discloses the bottom of the bottom dielectric fin (bottom portion of 182 in Fig. 22, paragraph 0062) tapers downward, and a top of the bottom dielectric fin (middle portion of 182 in Fig. 22, paragraph 0062) tapers upward.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Chen to form the bottom of the bottom dielectric fin tapers downward, and a top of the bottom dielectric fin tapers upward, as taught by Jun, since the first device isolation structure 180 (Jo, Fig. 22, paragraph 0056) may isolate the first fin type pattern 110 (Jo, Fig. 22, paragraph 0056) and the second fin type pattern 210 (Jo, Fig. 22, paragraph 0056) from each other.
Regarding claim 8, Chen discloses the device of claim 1, however Chen does not disclose a bottom surface of the bottom dielectric fin is rounded.
Jo discloses a bottom surface of the bottom dielectric fin (bottom portion of 182 in Fig. 22, paragraph 0062) is rounded.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Chen to form a bottom surface of the bottom dielectric fin is rounded, as taught by Jun, since the first device isolation structure 180 (Jo, Fig. 22, paragraph 0056) may isolate the first fin type pattern 110 (Jo, Fig. 22, paragraph 0056) and the second fin type pattern 210 (Jo, Fig. 22, paragraph 0056) from each other.
Claims 9, 10, 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 2020/0075342) (hereafter Chen), in view of Yu et al. (US 2020/0152736) (hereafter Yu).
Regarding claim 9, Chen discloses a device comprising:
a channel layer 22 (Fig. 8C, paragraph 0015) over a base portion of a substrate 20 (Fig. 8C, paragraph 0022);
an isolation layer 24b (Fig. 8A, paragraph 0026) in contact with the base portion of the substrate 20 (Fig. 8A);
a dielectric fin structure 26a (Fig. 8A, paragraph 0032) protruding from the isolation layer 24b (Fig. 8A) and comprising:
a bottom dielectric fin (bottom portion of 26a in Fig. 8A) in contact with the isolation layer 24b (Fig. 8A); and
a top dielectric fin (top portion of 26a in Fig. 8A) over the bottom dielectric fin (bottom portion of 26a in Fig. 8A);
a gate structure (60, 62, 64, and 66 in Fig. 8A) warping around the channel layer 22 (Fig. 8A) and across the dielectric fin structure 26a (Fig. 8A); and
a source/drain epitaxial structure 52 (Fig. 8C, paragraph 0043) connected to the channel layer 22 (Fig. 8C) and adjacent (see Fig. 8B) to the dielectric fin structure 26a (Fig. 8B), wherein the source/drain epitaxial structure 52 (Fig. 8B) has a sidewall facing the dielectric fin structure 26a (Fig. 8B), and the sidewall of the source/drain epitaxial structure 52 (Fig. 8B) is not parallel to a sidewall of the top dielectric fin (top portion of 26a in Fig. 8B) of the dielectric fin structure 26a (Fig. 8B).
Chen does not disclose a bottom surface of the top dielectric fin is concave.
Yu discloses a bottom surface of the top dielectric fin 170 (Fig. 10B, paragraph 0038) is concave.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Chen to form a bottom surface of the top dielectric fin is concave, as taught by Yu, since sealing layer 170 (Yu, Fig. 10B, paragraph 0038) pinches off upper end 174 (Yu, Fig. 10B, paragraph 0038), creating gate cut isolation 180 (Yu, Fig. 10B, paragraph 0038) with air gap 18 (Yu, Fig. 10B, paragraph 0038).
Regarding claim 10, Chen further discloses the device of claim 9, wherein the bottom surface of the top dielectric fin (top portion of 26a in Fig. 8A) comprises a bottommost portion (bottom of 30 in Fig. 8A) and two concave portions (lateral portions of 26a in Fig. 8A) on opposite sides of the bottommost portion (bottom of 30 in Fig. 8A).
Regarding claim 12, Chen further discloses the device of claim 9, wherein the top dielectric fin (top portion of 26a in Fig. 8A) is spaced apart from the isolation layer 24b (Fig. 8A).
Regarding claim 14, Chen in view of Yu discloses the device of claim 9, however Chen do not explicitly disclose a height of the top dielectric fin is in a range of about 20 nm to about 30 nm.
Regarding the limitation, “a height of the top dielectric fin is in a range of about 20 nm to about 30 nm”, Fig. 9A and paragraph 0066 of Chen disclose the height difference between D9 and D8 is at least 28.1 nm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Chen in view of Yu to form a height of the top dielectric fin is in a range of about 20 nm to about 30 nm, since a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). In addition, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Note that the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed ranges or any unexpected results arising therefrom. Where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen dimensions or upon another variable recited in a claim, the applicant must show that the chosen dimensions are critical. In re Woodruff, 919 f.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Claims 11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Yu as applied to claims 9 and 10 above, and further in view of Jun et al. (US 2018/0047634) (hereafter Jun).
Regarding claim 11, Chen in view of Yu discloses the device of claim 10, however Chen and Yu do not disclose the top surface of the top dielectric fin is rounder than the two concave portions of the bottom surface of the top dielectric fin.
Jun discloses the top surface of the top dielectric fin 88 (Fig. 26A, paragraph 0044) is rounder than the two concave portions (lateral portion of 88 contacting 58 in Fig. 26A) of the bottom surface of the top dielectric fin 88 (Fig. 26A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Chen in view of Yu to form the top surface of the top dielectric fin is rounder than the two concave portions of the bottom surface of the top dielectric fin, as taught by Jun, since the upper insulating patterns 88 and 89 (Jun, Fig. 26A, paragraph 0044) and the gate structures GS (Jun, Fig. 26A, paragraph 0044) may play a role in preventing electrical shorts from occurring between the contact structures and conductive patterns disposed adjacent thereto.
Regarding claim 13, Chen in view of Yu discloses the device of claim 9, however Chen and Yu do not disclose the top dielectric fin tapers upward.
Jun discloses the top dielectric fin 88 (Fig. 26A, paragraph 0044) tapers upward.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Chen in view of Yu to form the top dielectric fin tapers upward, as taught by Jun, since the upper insulating patterns 88 and 89 (Jun, Fig. 26A, paragraph 0044) and the gate structures GS (Jun, Fig. 26A, paragraph 0044) may play a role in preventing electrical shorts from occurring between the contact structures and conductive patterns disposed adjacent thereto.
Claims 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 2020/0044045) (hereafter Wang), in view of Chen et al. (US 2020/0075342) (hereafter Chen).
Regarding claim 15, Wang discloses a device comprising:
a substrate 202 (Fig. 8A, paragraph 0018);
a plurality of nanostructures (element number is not shown in Fig. 8A but see 204A in Fig. 3B and paragraph 0023) arranged over the substrate 202 (Fig. 8A) along a vertical direction (vertical direction in Fig. 8A);
epitaxial source/drain structures (element number is not shown in Fig. 8A but see 250 in Fig. 7A and paragraph 0029) over the substrate 202 (Fig. 8A) and connected to the plurality of nanostructures (element number is not shown in Fig. 8A but see 204A in Fig. 3B).
Wang does not disclose a dielectric fin between the epitaxial source/drain structures , wherein the dielectric fin has a top portion and a bottom portion under the top portion, the top portion and the bottom portion comprise different compositions; and
an interlayer dielectric (ILD) layer surrounding the dielectric fin and the epitaxial source/drain structures.
Chen discloses a dielectric fin (26A and 54 in Fig. 8B) between the epitaxial source/drain structures 52 (Fig. 8B, paragraph 0044), wherein the dielectric fin (26A and 54 in Fig. 8B) has a top portion 54 (Fig. 8B, paragraph 0046) and a bottom portion 26A (Fig. 8B, paragraph 0032) under the top portion 54 (Fig. 8B), the top portion 54 (Fig. 8B, paragraph 0045, wherein “silicon nitride”) and the bottom portion 26A (Fig. 8B, paragraph 0032; and see paragraph 0023, wherein “carbon-containing dielectric material, such as silicon oxycarbon nitride (SiO.sub.xC.sub.yN.sub.z), silicon carbide (SiC.sub.x), silicon carbon nitride (SiC.sub.xN.sub.y), the like, or a combination thereof”) comprise different compositions; and
an interlayer dielectric (ILD) layer 56 (Fig. 8B, paragraph 0046) surrounding the dielectric fin (26A and 54 in Fig. 8B) and the epitaxial source/drain structures 52 (Fig. 8B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Wang to form a dielectric fin between the epitaxial source/drain structures, wherein the dielectric fin has a top portion and a bottom portion under the top portion, the top portion and the bottom portion comprise different compositions; and an interlayer dielectric (ILD) layer surrounding the dielectric fin and the epitaxial source/drain structures, as taught by Chen, since a dielectric fin (Chen, 26A and 54 in Fig. 8B) electrical isolates between the epitaxial source/drain structures 52 (Fig. 8B, paragraph 0044).
Regarding claim 16, Wang in view of Chen discloses the device of claim 15, however Wang does not disclose the bottom portion of the dielectric fin comprises carbon-containing material.
Chen discloses the bottom portion of the dielectric fin (26A and 54 in Fig. 8B; and see paragraph 0032; and see paragraph 0023, wherein “carbon-containing dielectric material, such as silicon oxycarbon nitride (SiO.sub.xC.sub.yN.sub.z), silicon carbide (SiC.sub.x), silicon carbon nitride (SiC.sub.xN.sub.y), the like, or a combination thereof”) comprises carbon-containing material.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Wang to form the bottom portion of the dielectric fin comprises carbon-containing material, as taught by Chen, since applicant has not disclosed that the claimed material is for a particular unobvious purpose, produces an unexpected result, or is otherwise critical, which are criteria that have been held to be necessary for material limitations to be prima facie unobvious. The claimed material is considered to be a "preferred" or "optimum" material out of a plurality of well known materials that a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have found obvious to provide to the invention of the cited prior art reference, using routine experimentation and optimization of the invention. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Regarding claim 17, Wang in view of Chen discloses the device of claim 15, however Wang does not disclose the top portion of the dielectric fin is free from carbon.
Chen discloses the top portion 54 (Fig. 8B, paragraph 0045, wherein “silicon nitride”) of the dielectric fin (26A and 54 in Fig. 8B) is free from carbon.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Wang to form the top portion of the dielectric fin is free from carbon, as taught by Chen, since applicant has not disclosed that the claimed material is for a particular unobvious purpose, produces an unexpected result, or is otherwise critical, which are criteria that have been held to be necessary for material limitations to be prima facie unobvious. The claimed material is considered to be a "preferred" or "optimum" material out of a plurality of well known materials that a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have found obvious to provide to the invention of the cited prior art reference, using routine experimentation and optimization of the invention. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Regarding claim 18, Wang in view of Chen discloses the device of claim 15, however Wang does not disclose the bottom portion of the dielectric fin has a thickness different from a thickness of the top portion of the dielectric fin.
Chen discloses the bottom portion 26A (Fig. 8B) of the dielectric fin (26A and 54 in Fig. 8B) has a thickness (horizontal length of 26A in Fig. 8B) different from a thickness (horizontal length of 54 in Fig. 8B) of the top portion 54 (Fig. 8B) of the dielectric fin (26A and 54 in Fig. 8B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Wang to form the bottom portion of the dielectric fin has a thickness different from a thickness of the top portion of the dielectric fin, as taught by Chen, since a dielectric fin (Chen, 26A and 54 in Fig. 8B) electrical isolates between the epitaxial source/drain structures 52 (Fig. 8B, paragraph 0044).
Regarding claim 19, Wang in view of Chen discloses the device of claim 15, however Wang does not disclose the bottom portion of the dielectric fin has a thickness greater than a thickness of the top portion of the dielectric fin.
Chen discloses the bottom portion 26A (Fig. 8B) of the dielectric fin (26A and 54 in Fig. 8B) has a thickness (longest vertical length of 26A in Fig. 8B) greater than a thickness (vertical length of 54 between 26a and 56 in Fig. 8B) of the top portion 54 (Fig. 8B) of the dielectric fin (26A and 54 in Fig. 8B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Wang to form the bottom portion of the dielectric fin has a thickness greater than a thickness of the top portion of the dielectric fin, as taught by Chen, since a dielectric fin (Chen, 26A and 54 in Fig. 8B) electrical isolates between the epitaxial source/drain structures 52 (Fig. 8B, paragraph 0044).
Regarding claim 20, Wang in view of Chen discloses the device of claim 15, however Wang does not disclose the top portion of the dielectric fin has a bottom surface lower than a top surface of one of the epitaxial source/drain structures.
Chen discloses the top portion 54 (Fig. 8B) of the dielectric fin (26A and 54 in Fig. 8B) has a bottom surface (bottom surface of 54 in Fig. 8B) lower than a top surface (top surface of 52 in Fig. 8B) of one of the epitaxial source/drain structures 52 (Fig. 8B, paragraph 0044).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Wang to form the top portion of the dielectric fin has a bottom surface lower than a top surface of one of the epitaxial source/drain structures, as taught by Chen, since a dielectric fin (Chen, 26A and 54 in Fig. 8B) electrical isolates between the epitaxial source/drain structures 52 (Fig. 8B, paragraph 0044).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAMONT B KOO whose telephone number is (571)272-0984. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 AM - 3:30 PM.
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 Gauthier can be reached on (571)270-0373. 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.
/L.B.K/Examiner, Art Unit 2813
/STEVEN B GAUTHIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2813
Prosecution Insights