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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 9/23/24, 4/2/26 and 7/6/26 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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, 2, 6, 7, 8 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kasai, US 2020/0287007.
Regarding claim 1, a method for manufacturing a semiconductor device (Abstract and at least Figures 5C-5F and 6), the method comprising: forming a thin-film structure on a substrate (32 and 42 formed on substrate 9); forming a trench (49) into the thin film structure; forming a blocking layer (52) covering at least a portion of the trench; forming a charge storage layer (542) on the blocking layer; doping carbon into the charge storage layer ([0068]); forming a tunneling layer (56) on the charge storage layer; and forming a channel layer (601) covering the tunneling layer and the substrate.
Regarding claim 2, Kasai teaches the invention as explained above regarding claim 1 and further teaches when the charge storage layer has been formed, a carbon compound is supplied into a chamber in which the semiconductor device has been placed, wherein a heat treatment is performed on the semiconductor device in a state in which a pressure in the chamber is set to a predetermined process pressure ([0068]).
Regarding claim 6, Kasai teaches the invention as explained above regarding claim 2 and further teaches the carbon compound includes at least one of CH4, C2H4, C2H6, C3H7, C3H8, iC4H10, nC4H10, nC5H12, C6H6, C6H12, C7H8, C8H18, C10H22, or C12H26 ([0068]).
Regarding claim 7, Kasai teaches a semiconductor device (Abstract and at least Figures 5C-5F and 6) comprising: a substrate (9); a thin film structure formed on the substrate (32/42); a blocking layer (52) covering at least a portion of a trench (49) formed in the thin film structure; a charge storage layer (542) formed on the blocking layer; a tunneling layer (56) formed on the charge storage layer; and a channel layer (601) covering the tunneling layer and the substrate, wherein the charge storage layer is doped with carbon ([0068]).
Regarding claim 8, Kasai teaches the invention as explained above regarding claim 7 and further teaches when the charge storage layer has been formed, a carbon compound is supplied into a chamber in which the semiconductor device has been placed, wherein a heat treatment is performed on the semiconductor device in a state in which a pressure in the chamber is set to a predetermined process pressure ([0068]).
Regarding claim 12, Kasai teaches the invention as explained above regarding claim 8 and further teaches the carbon compound includes at least one of CH4, C2H4, C2H6, C3H7, C3H8, iC4H10, nC4H10, nC5H12, C6H6, C6H12, C7H8, C8H18, C10H22, or C12H26 ([0068]).
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 3-5 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kasai.
Regarding claim 3, Kasai teaches the invention as explained above regarding claim 2. Although Kasai fails to teach the exact claimed range of pressures, Kasai does teach the chamber is set to a predetermined pressure of 1-100 Torr, and further teaches greater pressures can be used. Lacking criticality and unexpected results, it would have been an obvious matter of routine experimentation and optimization for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to determine a higher workable range above the range taught by Kasai in order to achieve the best results in the shortest amount of time.
Regarding claim 4, Kasai teaches the invention as explained above regarding claim 2. Although Kasai fails to teach the atmospheric gas is H2, D2 or N2, Kasai does teach a carbon precursor gas comprising H2, D2 or N2 ([0068]). Therefore, lacking criticality or unexpected results, it is the position of the examiner that it would have been an obvious matter of design choice for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to utilize a carbon precursor gas in lieu of separate gas and carbon compound to form the carbon doped layer in order to increase efficiency.
Regarding claim 5, Kasai teaches the invention as explained above regarding claim 2. Although Kasai fails to teach the exact temperature range claimed by applicant, Kasai further teaches heat treatment at a temperature of 200-800 degrees Celsius ([0068]). Lacking criticality and unexpected results, it would have been an obvious matter of routine experimentation and optimization for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to determine a smaller workable range within the range taught by Kasai in order to achieve the best results in the shortest amount of time.
Regarding claim 9, Kasai teaches the invention as explained above regarding claim 8. Although Kasai fails to teach the exact claimed range of pressures, Kasai does teach the chamber is set to a predetermined pressure of 1-100 Torr, and further teaches greater pressures can be used. Lacking criticality and unexpected results, it would have been an obvious matter of routine experimentation and optimization for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to determine a higher workable range above the range taught by Kasai in order to achieve the best results in the shortest amount of time.
Regarding claim 10, Kasai teaches the invention as explained above regarding claim 8. Although Kasai fails to teach the atmospheric gas is H2, D2 or N2, Kasai does teach a carbon precursor gas comprising H2, D2 or N2 ([0068]). Therefore, lacking criticality or unexpected results, it is the position of the examiner that it would have been an obvious matter of design choice for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to utilize a carbon precursor gas in lieu of separate gas and carbon compound to form the carbon doped layer in order to increase efficiency.
Regarding claim 11, Kasai teaches the invention as explained above regarding claim 8. Although Kasai fails to teach the exact temperature range claimed by applicant, Kasai further teaches heat treatment at a temperature of 200-800 degrees Celsius ([0068]). Lacking criticality and unexpected results, it would have been an obvious matter of routine experimentation and optimization for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to determine a smaller workable range within the range taught by Kasai in order to achieve the best results in the shortest amount of time.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. KR 10-2018-0137720 teaches all of the limitations of independent claims 1 and 7.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARY-ELLEN BOWMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5383. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday; 7:00 am-5:00 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, James Greece can be reached at (571) 272-3711. 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.
MARY ELLEN BOWMAN
Examiner
Art Unit 2875
/MARY ELLEN BOWMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
