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) submitted on December 19, 2024 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because in FIG. 1, the source terminal 70 and the substrate tie 120 appear to be incompletely illustrated. The source terminal 70 appears to be cut off at the left edge of FIG. 1. The substrate tie 120 appears to be cut off at the right edge of FIG. 1.
The drawings are objected to because in FIG. 1, the left vertical line defining offset 130 needs to be repositioned so that it is tangent to a right end of high voltage deep N-well 30. Applicant’s specification states: “As shown in the example of FIG. 1, the high voltage deep N-well 30 may be offset 130 by 0.25 microns to 0.5 microns, laterally, with respect to the high voltage N-well 40” ([0013], lines 3-5).
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “a p-well implant extending from the gate terminal to the high voltage deep N-well,” as recited in claim 6, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Figure 1 shows that the p-well implant 90 does not extend all the way to the high voltage deep N-well 30, but rather there is a gap therebetween. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: there is no unit of measure after “2.5 e12” ([0011], line 5) and “2.0 e13” ([0011], line 9).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 5-7, 9 and 13-15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
“comprises” should read “further comprising” (claim 5, line 1; claim 6, line 1; claim 7, line 1; claim 13, line 1; claim 14, line 1; and claim 15, line 1);
“extend” should read “extends” (claim 9, line 10).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 2, 4, 7, 10, 12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
In claim 2, lines 2-3, the limitation “a direction opposite from the source terminal” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this direction is the same as or different from “a direction opposite from the source terminal” previously recited inclaim 1, lines 10-11. Applicant’s specification describes only one direction opposite from the source terminal. Accordingly, it is suggested Applicant amend “a direction opposite from the source terminal” to “the direction opposite from the source terminal.” For examination purposes, the limitation in question will be interpreted as: the direction opposite from the source terminal. Correction is respectfully requested.
In claim 4, lines 1-3, the limitation “an end of the high voltage deep N-well is laterally closer to a substrate tie of the high voltage deep N-well than an end of the high voltage N-well to the drain terminal” renders the claim indefinite because the comparison is unclear. Applicant’s specification states: “an end of the high voltage deep N-well 30 closest to a substrate tie 120 in the example of FIG. 1 may be laterally closer to the drain terminal 50 than an end of the high voltage N-well 40 closest to the substrate tie 120” ([0013], lines 8-10). Accordingly, it is suggested Applicant amend claim 4 to recite: “an end of the high voltage deep N-well closest to a substrate tie is laterally closer to the drain terminal than an end of the high voltage N-well closest to the substrate tie.” For examination purposes, the limitation in question will be interpreted as: an end of the high voltage deep N-well closest to a substrate tie is laterally closer to the drain terminal than an end of the high voltage N-well closest to the substrate tie. Correction is respectfully requested.
In claim 7, line 2, the limitation “the P-well” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this element is the same as or different from “a p-well implant” previously recited in claim 6, line 1. Applicant’s specification describes in [0011]: “A P-well 90, such as a 5-volt p-well, may be formed within the substrate 20, and the source terminal 70 may be formed above the P-well 90. The 5-Volt p-well is an implant used for CMOS logic area that may also be used for an LDMOS device 10.” It appears from Applicant’s description that “the P-well” and “a p-well implant” refer to the same p-type region. Accordingly, it is suggested Applicant amend “the P-well” to “the p-well implant” for consistency. For examination purposes, the limitation in question will be interpreted as: the p-well implant. Correction is respectfully requested.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the shallow trench isolation layer" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner observes that claim 5 recites “a shallow trench isolation layer” in line 1. Since claim 7 depends from claim 6, it is suggested Applicant amend claim 6 to depend from claim 5 rather than from claim 1. For examination purposes, the limitation in question will be interpreted as: a shallow trench isolation layer. Correction is respectfully requested.
In claim 10, lines 2-3, the limitation “a direction opposite from the source terminal” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this direction is the same as or different from “a direction opposite from the source terminal” previously recited inclaim 9, lines 10-11. Applicant’s specification describes only one direction opposite from the source terminal. Accordingly, it is suggested Applicant amend “a direction opposite from the source terminal” to “the direction opposite from the source terminal.” For examination purposes, the limitation in question will be interpreted as: the direction opposite from the source terminal. Correction is respectfully requested.
In claim 12, lines 1-3, the limitation “an end of the high voltage deep N-well is laterally closer to a substrate tie of the high voltage deep N-well than an end of the high voltage N-well to the drain terminal” renders the claim indefinite because the comparison is unclear. Applicant’s specification states: “an end of the high voltage deep N-well 30 closest to a substrate tie 120 in the example of FIG. 1 may be laterally closer to the drain terminal 50 than an end of the high voltage N-well 40 closest to the substrate tie 120” ([0013], lines 8-10). Accordingly, it is suggested Applicant amend claim 12 to recite: “an end of the high voltage deep N-well closest to a substrate tie is laterally closer to the drain terminal than an end of the high voltage N-well closest to the substrate tie.” For examination purposes, the limitation in question will be interpreted as: an end of the high voltage deep N-well closest to a substrate tie is laterally closer to the drain terminal than an end of the high voltage N-well closest to the substrate tie. Correction is respectfully requested.
In claim 15, line 2, the limitation “the P-well” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this element is the same as or different from “a p-well implant” previously recited in claim 14, line 1. Applicant’s specification describes in [0011]: “A P-well 90, such as a 5-volt p-well, may be formed within the substrate 20, and the source terminal 70 may be formed above the P-well 90. The 5-Volt p-well is an implant used for CMOS logic area that may also be used for an LDMOS device 10.” It appears from Applicant’s description that “the P-well” and “a p-well implant” refer to the same p-type region. Accordingly, it is suggested Applicant amend “the P-well” to “the p-well implant” for consistency. For examination purposes, the limitation in question will be interpreted as: the p-well implant. Correction is respectfully requested.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the shallow trench isolation layer" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner observes that claim 13 recites “a shallow trench isolation layer” in line 1. Since claim 15 depends from claim 14, it is suggested Applicant amend claim 14 to depend from claim 13 rather than from claim 9. For examination purposes, the limitation in question will be interpreted as: a shallow trench isolation layer. Correction is respectfully requested.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 14 and 15, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2009/0140372 A1 (hereinafter “Hodel”).
Regarding claim 1, Hodel discloses in Figs. 1, 2 and related text a semiconductor device (100; [0025]) comprising:
a substrate (114; [0036]);
a high voltage deep N-well (116; [0030] and [0037]) formed within the substrate;
a high voltage N-well (120; [0030] and [0037]) formed within the substrate and electrically coupled (by direct contact) to the high voltage deep N-well;
a drain terminal (D; [0040]) electrically coupled to the high voltage N-well;
a source terminal (S; [0038]); and
a gate terminal (G2; [0039]) disposed between the source terminal and the drain terminal;
wherein at least one of the high voltage N-well and the high voltage deep N-well extends less than 2.0 microns beyond the drain terminal in a direction opposite from the source terminal (the horizontal direction from left to right in the cross-sectional view of Fig. 2). (Note: dimension d2 of the LDMOS device 110a may be several nanometers (nm) to 1 or more micrometers ([Symbol font/0x6D]m), for example 1 [Symbol font/0x6D]m = 1 micron, as disclosed by Hodel in [0033]. If the dimension d2 of the device 110a in the x direction is 1 micron, then the extension of the high voltage deep N-well 116 beyond the drain terminal D in the x direction, as shown in Fig. 2, must necessarily be less than 1 micron because said extension is merely a fraction of the total width d2.)
Regarding claim 3, Hodel discloses the high voltage deep N-well is laterally offset by less than 0.5 microns with respect to the high voltage N-well (note: if the dimension d2 is 0.5 microns, which is within Hodel’s disclosed range (see [0033]), then the lateral offset must necessarily be less than 0.5 microns because said lateral offset is merely a fraction of the total width d2 as shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4, Hodel discloses an end of the high voltage deep N-well is laterally closer to a substrate tie (B; Fig. 2; [0038]) of the high voltage deep N-well than an end of the high voltage N-well to the drain terminal.
Regarding claim 6, Hodel discloses a p-well implant (118; Fig. 2; [0037]) extending from the gate terminal to the high voltage deep N-well.
Regarding claim 7, Hodel discloses an accumulation region (positively charged holes will accumulate at the interface between the p-well implant 118 and the gate oxide (not shown) when a negative voltage is applied to the gate terminal G2; [0039]) extending laterally between the P-well beneath the gate terminal to the shallow trench isolation layer (126; Fig. 2; [0038]).
Regarding claim 9, Hodel discloses in Figs. 1, 2 and related text a method of manufacturing a semiconductor device (100; [0025]), the method comprising:
forming a high voltage deep N-well (116; [0030] and [0037]) within a substrate (114; [0036]);
forming a high voltage N-well (120; [0030] and [0037]) within the substrate, wherein the high voltage N-well is electrically coupled (by direct contact) to the high voltage deep N-well;
forming a drain terminal (D; [0040]) electrically coupled to the high voltage N-well;
forming a source terminal (S; [0038]); and
forming a gate terminal (G2; [0039]) disposed between the source terminal and the drain terminal;
wherein at least one of the high voltage N-well and the high voltage deep N-well extends less than 2.0 microns beyond the drain terminal in a direction opposite from the source terminal (the horizontal direction from left to right in the cross-sectional view of Fig. 2). (Note: dimension d2 of the LDMOS device 110a may be several nanometers (nm) to 1 or more micrometers ([Symbol font/0x6D]m), for example 1 [Symbol font/0x6D]m = 1 micron, as disclosed by Hodel in [0033]. If the dimension d2 of the device 110a in the x direction is 1 micron, then the extension of the high voltage deep N-well 116 beyond the drain terminal D in the x direction, as shown in Fig. 2, must necessarily be less than 1 micron because said extension is merely a fraction of the total width d2.)
Regarding claim 11, Hodel discloses the high voltage deep N-well is offset by less than 0.5 microns with respect to the high voltage N-well (note: if the dimension d2 is 0.5 microns, which is within Hodel’s disclosed range (see [0033]), then the lateral offset must necessarily be less than 0.5 microns because said lateral offset is merely a fraction of the total width d2 as shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 12, Hodel discloses an end of the high voltage deep N-well is laterally closer to a substrate tie (B; Fig. 2; [0038]) of the high voltage deep N-well than an end of the high voltage N-well to the drain terminal.
Regarding claim 14, Hodel discloses forming a p-well implant (118; Fig. 2; [0037]) extending from the gate terminal to the high voltage deep N-well.
Regarding claim 15, Hodel discloses forming an accumulation region (positively charged holes will accumulate at the interface between the p-well implant 118 and the gate oxide (not shown) when a negative voltage is applied to the gate terminal G2; [0039]) extending laterally between the P-well beneath the gate terminal to the shallow trench isolation layer (126; Fig. 2; [0038]).
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.
Claim(s) 8 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hodel.
Regarding claim 8, Hodel discloses the semiconductor device of claim 6.
Hodel does not explicitly disclose the p-well implant comprises a 5-volt p-well implant.
Nevertheless, Hodel discloses “the devices 110a and 110b preferably comprise high voltage devices adapted to operate at about 2.5 volts or higher” ([0030]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to form the p-well implant to comprise a 5-volt p-well implant because it has been held that in the case where the claimed ranges (in the instant case, a claimed value of 5 volts) "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" (i.e., about 2.5 volts or higher) a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976). MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 16, Hodel discloses the method of claim 14.
Hodel does not explicitly disclose the p-well implant comprises a 5-volt p-well implant.
Nevertheless, Hodel discloses “the devices 110a and 110b preferably comprise high voltage devices adapted to operate at about 2.5 volts or higher” ([0030]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to form the p-well implant to comprise a 5-volt p-well implant because it has been held that in the case where the claimed ranges (in the instant case, a claimed value of 5 volts) "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" (i.e., about 2.5 volts or higher) a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976). MPEP 2144.05(I).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action and 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: the prior art of record, individually or in combination, does not teach or suggest “the high voltage N-well and the high voltage deep N-well extend less than 2.0 microns beyond the drain terminal in a direction opposite from the source terminal” as recited in claims 2 and 10.
Claims 5 and 13 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 a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record, individually or in combination, does not teach or suggest “a shallow trench isolation layer extending from the gate terminal to the high voltage N-well” as recited in claim 5, and “forming a shallow trench isolation layer extending from the gate terminal to the high voltage N-well” as recited in claim 13.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER M ALBRECHT whose telephone number is (571)272-7813. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 AM - 6:30 PM (CT).
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.
/PETER M ALBRECHT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2811
Prosecution Insights