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 .
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.
Claims 1, 13-15, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al (US Publication No. 2014/0264727).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a semiconductor device comprising: an active pattern Fig 9A, 110 on a substrate Fig 9B, 100, the active pattern Fig 9A, 110 comprising a first tab Fig 9A, 10B/110D, a second tab Fig 9A, 110C/110E, and an active bar Fig 9A, 110A between the first tab Fig 9A, 110B/110D and the second tab Fig 9A, 110C/110E; a gate structure extending into the active bar of the active pattern in a first direction that is substantially parallel to an upper surface of the substrate¶0069, 0107; a bit line structure Fig 10B, 172 ¶00076-0077 on the first tab of the active pattern and extending in a second direction that is substantially parallel to the upper surface of the substrate and orthogonal to the first direction Fig 10A; a contact plug structure Fig 10B, 182 on the second tab of the active pattern Fig 16; and a capacitor Fig 10B, 190 on the contact plug structure Fig 10B, wherein the active bar of the active pattern extends in a third direction, wherein the first tab and the second tab of the active pattern are respectively on a first end of the active bar and a second end of the active bar that is opposite to the first end in the third direction and extend from the active bar in the second direction Fig 9B and Fig 10B, wherein the third direction is substantially parallel to the upper surface of the substrate, defines an obtuse angle with respect to the first direction, and defines an acute angle with respect to the second direction Fig 9A, 10A and Fig 11-17.
Regarding claim 13, Kim discloses wherein the contact plug structure further comprises a first contact plug directly contacting the second tab of the active pattern, and wherein an upper surface of the first contact plug and an upper surface of the second tab of the active pattern have substantially a same shape in a plan view Fig 16.
Regarding claim 14, Kim discloses a semiconductor device comprising: a plurality of active patterns Fig 9A, 110 that are on a substrate Fig 9B, 100 and spaced apart in a first direction and a second direction that is orthogonal to the first direction Fig 9A-9B, Fig 11-16, wherein each active pattern of the plurality of active patterns comprises a first tab Fig 9A, 110B/11D, a second tab Fig 9A, 110C/110E spaced apart from the first tab in a third direction Fig 9A, and an active bar Fig 9A, 110A that is between the first tab and the second tab and extends in the third direction Fig 9A, wherein the third direction is substantially parallel to an upper surface of the substrate Fig 9A-9B, Fig 11-16, defines an obtuse angle with respect to the first direction, and defines an acute angle with respect to the second direction Fig 9A-9B, Fig 11-16, and wherein the first tab and the second tab of each of the plurality of active patterns extend in the second direction from the active bar Fig 9A-9B, Fig 11-16.
Regarding claim 15, Kim discloses wherein: a first set of the plurality of active patterns that are spaced apart in the first direction defines a first active pattern row among a plurality of active pattern rows that are spaced apart from each other in the second direction Fig 9A-9B, Fig 11-16, a second set of the plurality of active patterns that are spaced apart in the first direction defines a second active pattern row among the plurality of active pattern rows is adjacent to the first set of the plurality of active patterns, and the first tab of each of the first set of the plurality of active patterns and the second tab of each of the second set of the plurality of active patterns are alternately stacked in the first direction Fig 9A-9B, Fig 11-16.
Regarding claim 20, Kim discloses semiconductor device comprising: a plurality of active patterns Fig 9A, 110 that are on a substrate and spaced apart in a first direction and a second direction that is orthogonal to the first direction Fig 9A-9B, Fig 11-16, wherein: each active pattern of the plurality of active patterns comprises a first tab Fig 9A, 110B/11D, a second tab Fig 9A, 110C/110E spaced apart from the first tab in a third direction Fig 9A and an active bar Fig 9A, 110A that is between the first tab and the second tab and extends in the third direction Fig 9A, wherein the third direction is substantially parallel to an upper surface of the substrate Fig 9A-9B, Fig 11-16, defines an obtuse angle with respect to the first direction, and defines an acute angle with respect to the second direction Fig 9A-9B, Fig 11-16,the first tab and the second tab of each of the plurality of active patterns extend in the second direction from the active bar, a first set of the plurality of active patterns are spaced apart in the first direction Fig 9A-9B, Fig 11-16, and a second set of the plurality of active patterns are spaced apart in the second direction Fig 9A-9B, Fig 11-16, a gate structure extending into the active bars of the first set of the plurality of active patterns ¶0069, 0107; a bit line structure Fig 10B, 172 ¶00076-0077 extending into the first tabs of the second set of the plurality of active patterns; contact plug structures Fig 10B, 182 that are respectively on the second tabs of the plurality of active patterns; and capacitors Fig 10B, 190 that are respectively on the contact plug structures.
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, 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 2-12, 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (US Publication No. 2014/0264727).
Regarding claims 2-6, 16-19, Kim discloses all the limitations but silent on the shape of the active pattern. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify the shape, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In reDailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Regarding claims 7-12, Kim discloses all the limitations but silent on the arrangement /shape/size of the active pattern. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify the shape, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In reDailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). Also, A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1995). It has been held that mere dimensional limitations are prima facie obvious absent a disclosure that the limitations are for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected result, or are otherwise critical. See, for example, In re Rose, 220 F. 2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); In re Rinehart, 531 F .2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976); Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F .2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984); In re Dailey, 357 F .2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE A ENAD whose telephone number is (571)270-7891. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:30 am -4:30 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, Lynne Gurley can be reached at 571 272 1670. 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.
/CHRISTINE A ENAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2811
Prosecution Insights