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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 07/25/24 was/were received by the Examiner before the issuance/mailing date of the first office action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) has/have been considered (except for anything in foreign language non-accompanied by an English translation) by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 6 recites “the first portion has a thickness greater than the second portion.”. This limitation is comparing a thickness to the second portion without defining which characteristic (thickness, width, length etc…) of the second portion it is being compared to, and that s incorrect. The Examiner has assumed “the first portion has a thickness greater than a thickness of the second portion.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claim(s) 1-8 and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Alptekin et al. (US 9,431,399).
a. Re claim 1, Alptekin et al. disclose a semiconductor device, comprising: a source/drain feature S/D1 see annotated fig. 26 below; see figs. 13-26 and related text for more details) formed over a first fin F1, wherein a top surface of the source/drain feature defines a first plane P1; an isolation structure IS (see annotated fig. 26) disposed adjacent to the source/drain feature; wherein the isolation structure has a first region R1 with an uppermost surface that defines a second plane P2 disposed a first distance D1 from the first plane, and wherein the isolation structure has a second region R2 having an uppermost surface that defines a third plane P3 disposed a second distance D2 from the first plane, wherein the second distance is greater than the first distance (explicit on annotated fig. 26).
PNG
media_image1.png
789
1247
media_image1.png
Greyscale
b. Re claim 2, the semiconductor device of claim 1, further comprises: an isolation region IR (see annotated fig. 26) disposed beneath the isolation structure.
c. Re claim 3, the semiconductor device of claim 2, further comprises: a second fin F2 (see annotated fig. 26) adjacent to the first fin, wherein the isolation region extends between the first fin and the second fin (explicit on annotated fig. 26).
d. Re claim 4, the isolation region includes a shallow trench isolation (STI) region 302 (col. 5 ln. 12-22).
e. Re claim 5, the semiconductor device of claim 1, further comprises: a first metal layer 2502 (left one; see col. 7 ln. 16-24) including a first portion (see annotated fig. 26 below) disposed over the source/drain feature and a second portion (see annotated fig. 26 below) contiguous with the first portion and extending over the isolation structure.
PNG
media_image2.png
870
1325
media_image2.png
Greyscale
f. Re claim 6, the first portion has a thickness greater than a thickness of the second portion (explicit on annotated fig. 26).
g. Re claim 7, the second portion of the first metal layer extends over the first region of the isolation structure (explicit in view of annotated figs. 26 above).
h. Re claim 8, the second region of the isolation structure is disposed above (in terms of height) a second fin F2 adjacent to the first fin (see annotated fig. 26).
i. Re claim 10, the semiconductor device of claim 5, further comprises a second metal layer 2502 (right one) over another source/drain feature S/D2 (see annoted fig. 26) formed over a second fin F2 adjacent to the first fin.
j. Re claim 11, the second metal layer interfaces a first (right) sidewall of the second region of the isolation structure (see annotated fig. 26).
k. Re claim 12, the first metal layer interfaces a second (left) sidewall of the second region of the isolation structure opposite the first sidewall (see annotated fig. 26).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-20 are allowed.
Claim 9 is 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PENIEL M GUMEDZOE whose telephone number is (571)270-3041. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00AM - 5:30PM.
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, Dale Page can be reached at 5712707877. 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.
/PENIEL M GUMEDZOE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights