Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/890,051

SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE INCLUDING TWO-DIMENSIONAL MATERIAL AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Sep 19, 2024
Priority
Nov 23, 2023 — RE 10-2023-0164856
Examiner
YEUNG LOPEZ, FEIFEI
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
4m
Est. Remaining
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allowance Rate
884 granted / 1088 resolved
+21.3% vs TC avg
Minimal -3% lift
Without
With
+-2.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
1123
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
55.2%
+15.2% vs TC avg
§102
24.1%
-15.9% vs TC avg
§112
17.3%
-22.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1088 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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. (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. Claim(s) 1-3,6,7,9,10,12-15,18,19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chou et al (PG Pub 2023/0008409 A1). Regarding claim 1, Chou teaches a semiconductor device comprising: a channel layer (126/126A to 126C) including a two-dimensional semiconductor material (paragraph [0058]); a source electrode and a drain electrode (210N/210P, paragraphs [0060][0064]) spaced apart from each other on the channel layer; a gate insulating layer (182, paragraph [0051]) on the channel layer, and the gate insulating layer including a two-dimensional insulating material (a sheet as thin as 1 nm thick, paragraph [0070]); an interlayer (180) between the channel layer and the gate insulating layer; and a gate electrode (194) on the gate insulating layer. Regarding claim 2, Chou teaches the semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein the two-dimensional semiconductor material comprises transition metal dichalcogenide (WS2, paragraph [0047]). Regarding claim 3, Chou teaches the semiconductor device of claim 2, wherein the transition metal dichalcogenide comprises a metal element (WS2, paragraph [0047]) selected from the group consisting of Mo, W, Nb, V, Ta, Ti, Zr, Hf, Tc, and Re, and a chalcogen element selected from the group consisting of S, Se, and Te. Regarding claim 6, Chou teaches the semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein the interlayer comprises at least one of transition metal oxide (WO, paragraph [0047]) or transition metal sulfide. Regarding claim 7, Chou teaches the semiconductor device of claim 6, wherein the transition metal oxide includes oxide of an element selected from the group consisting of Nb, Ta, Mo, and W (WO, paragraph [0047]). Regarding claim 9, Chou teaches the semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein a thickness of the interlayer is in a range of about 0.1 nm to about 5 nm (paragraph [0070]). Regarding claim 10, Chou teaches the semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein the interlayer comprises 1 to 10 layers (one layer 180). Regarding claim 12, Chou teaches the semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein the gate electrode is on at least one of an upper portion or a lower portion of the channel layer (figs. 1-14). Regarding claim 13, Chou teaches an electronic device comprising the semiconductor device according to claim 1 (figs. 1-14). Regarding claim 14, Chou teaches (see claim 1) a method of manufacturing a semiconductor device comprising: forming a channel layer, the channel layer including a two-dimensional semiconductor material; forming an interlayer on the channel layer; forming a gate insulating layer on the interlayer, the gate insulating layer including a two-dimensional insulating material; forming a gate electrode on the gate insulating layer; and forming a source electrode and a drain electrode spaced apart from each other on the channel layer. Regarding claim 15, Chou teaches the method of claim 14, wherein the two-dimensional semiconductor material includes transition metal dichalcogenide (paragraph [0047]). Regarding claim 18, Chou teaches the method of claim 14, wherein the interlayer comprises at least one of transition metal oxide (WO, paragraph [0047]) or transition metal sulfide. Regarding claim 19, Chou teaches the method of claim 14, wherein a thickness of the interlayer is in a range of about 0.1 nm to about 5 nm (paragraph [0070]). 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 4,5,16,17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou et al (PG Pub 2023/0008409 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 14 above, and further in view of Osada et al. "A- and B-Site Modified Perovskite Nanosheets and Their Integrations into High-k Dielectric Thin Films", International Journal of Applied Ceramic Technology, 9(1), 29-36, Published 2012, a reference cited by Applicant. Regarding claims 4 and 16, Chou remains as applied in claims 1 and 14. Chou does not teach wherein the two-dimensional insulating material comprises Ca2(Nb(1-x)Tax)3O10 (0.3≤x≤1). In the same field of endeavor, Osada teaches a two-dimensional insulating material comprises Ca2(Nb(1-x)Tax)3O10 (0.3≤x≤1), for benefits such as achieving low leakage and minimal frequency-dependent dielectric constant (fig. 3). Thus, it would have been obvious to the skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make the two-dimensional insulating material to comprise Ca2(Nb(1-x)Tax)3O10 (0.3≤x≤1), for benefits such as achieving low leakage and minimal frequency-dependent dielectric constant Regarding claims 5 and 17, Chou remains as applied in claims 1 and 14. Chou does not teach wherein the two-dimensional insulating material comprises Sr2(Nb(1-x)Tax)3O10 (0.3≤x≤1). In the same field of endeavor, Osada teaches a two-dimensional insulating material comprises Sr2(Nb(1-x)Tax)3O10 (0.3≤x≤1), for benefits such as achieving low leakage and minimal frequency-dependent dielectric constant (fig. 3). Thus, it would have been obvious to the skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make the two-dimensional insulating material to comprise Sr2(Nb(1-x)Tax)3O10 (0.3≤x≤1) for benefits such as achieving low leakage and minimal frequency-dependent dielectric constant. Claim(s) 8,11,20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou et al (PG Pub 2023/0008409 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 14 above, and further in view of Chamlagain et al. "Thermally oxidized 2D TaS2 as a high-? gate dielectric for MoS2 field-effect transistors", 2D Materials, 4(3), 031002, Published June 22, 2017, a reference cited by Applicant. Regarding claim 8, Chou remains as applied in claim 1. Chou does not teach the semiconductor device of claim 6, wherein the transition metal sulfide includes sulfide of an element selected from the group consisting of Nb, Ta, Mo, and W. In the same field of endeavor, Chamlagain teaches a transition metal sulfide includes sulfide (TaS2, page 7, right column) of an element selected from the group consisting of Nb, Ta, Mo, and W, for benefits of providing an interfacial layer with high dielectric quality and low interface trap density (abstract). Thus, it would have been obvious to the skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make the transition metal sulfide includes sulfide of an element selected from the group consisting of Nb, Ta, Mo, and W, for benefits of providing an interfacial layer with high dielectric quality and low interface trap density. Regarding claim 11, Chou remains as applied in claim 1. Chou does not teach the interlayer includes a first layer adjacent to the channel layer, the first layer including transition metal sulfide, and a second layer adjacent to the gate insulating layer, the second layer including transition metal oxide. In the same field of endeavor, Chamlagain teaches an interlayer includes a first layer adjacent to the channel layer, the first layer including transition metal sulfide (TaS2), and a second layer (Ta2O5) adjacent to the gate insulating layer, the second layer including transition metal oxide (page 7, right column), for benefits of providing an interfacial layer with high dielectric quality and low interface trap density (abstract). Thus, it would have been obvious to the skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make the interlayer includes a first layer adjacent to the channel layer, the first layer including transition metal sulfide, and a second layer adjacent to the gate insulating layer, the second layer including transition metal oxide, for benefits of providing an interfacial layer with high dielectric quality and low interface trap density. Regarding claim 20, Chou remains as applied in claim 14. Chou does not teach the forming of the interlayer comprises forming a first layer on the channel layer, the first layer including a transition metal sulfide, and forming a second layer on the first layer, the second layer including a transition metal oxide. Chamlagain teaches the forming of the interlayer comprises forming a first layer (TaS2) on the channel layer, the first layer including a transition metal sulfide (Ta2O5), and forming a second layer on the first layer (page 7, right column), the second layer including a transition metal oxide, for benefits of providing an interfacial layer with high dielectric quality and low interface trap density (abstract). Thus, it would have been obvious to the skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make the forming of the interlayer comprises forming a first layer on the channel layer, the first layer including a transition metal sulfide, and forming a second layer on the first layer, the second layer including a transition metal oxide, for benefits of providing an interfacial layer with high dielectric quality and low interface trap density. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FEIFEI YEUNG LOPEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-1882. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8am to 4pm EST. 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 571 270 7877. 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. /FEIFEI YEUNG LOPEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 19, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12733299
DISPLAY DEVICE AND LIGHT EMITTING DIODE CHIP
3y 1m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12713908
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
2y 7m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Patent 12707907
CONTROL AND LOCALIZATION OF POROSITY IN III-NITRIDES AND METHODS OF USING AND MAKING THEREOF
4y 0m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12707679
SHIFTED-CHANNEL STACKED FETS
2y 7m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12701852
DISPLAY DEVICE AND TILED DISPLAY DEVICE
3y 6m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (-2.7%)
2y 5m (~4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1088 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month