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 March 17, 2025 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.
Claim Objections
Claims 10, 12 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
“a” should be inserted before “consistent thickness” (claim 10, line 1);
“the” should be inserted before “switching layer” (claim 12, line 1);
“a” should be inserted before “semiconductor device” (claim 17, line 1).
Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1-5 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2018/0212143 A1 (hereinafter “Tseng”).
Regarding claim 1, Tseng discloses in Fig. 1 and related text a semiconductor device, comprising:
a bottom electrode (120; [0021]);
a top electrode (170; [0021]), over the bottom electrode;
a switching layer (130; [0021] and [0028]-[0029]), between the bottom electrode and the top electrode, and configured to store data;
a metal reservoir layer (160; [0036]-[0037]), between the switching layer and the top electrode; and
a metal diffusion barrier layer (150; [0035]), between the metal reservoir layer and the switching layer, wherein the metal diffusion barrier layer obstructs diffusion of metal ions from the metal reservoir layer to the switching layer.
Regarding claim 2, Tseng discloses a material of the metal diffusion barrier layer comprises metal, metal nitride or a combination thereof ([0060]).
Regarding claim 3, Tseng discloses the metal comprises at least one of iridium (Ir), ruthenium (Ru), platinum (Pt), tantalum (Ta), titanium (Ti), titanium tungsten (TiW) and tungsten (W) ([0060]).
Regarding claim 4, Tseng discloses the metal nitride comprises at least one of titanium tungsten nitride (TiW(N)), titanium nitride (TiN) and tungsten nitride (WN) ([0060]).
Regarding claim 5, Tseng discloses a thickness of the metal diffusion barrier layer is between approximately 2 angstroms and approximately 25 angstroms. (Tseng discloses in [0062] the thickness of the electron-capturing layer 140 is in a range of 3-6 nm (30-60 angstroms). Tseng further discloses in [0064] the total thickness of the electron-capturing layer and the barrier layer is in a range of 5-20 nm (50-200 angstroms). Therefore, if the thickness of the electron-capturing layer is selected to be 3 nm and the total thickness of the electron-capturing layer and the barrier layer is selected to be 5 nm, then the thickness of the barrier layer is 2 nm (20 angstroms) which is within the claimed range of between approximately 2 angstroms and approximately 25 angstroms.)
Regarding claim 17, Tseng discloses in Fig. 1 and related text a method for manufacturing a semiconductor device, comprising:
forming a bottom electrode (120; [0023]) over a substrate (110; [0022]);
forming a switching layer (130; [0027]) over the bottom electrode;
forming a metal diffusion barrier layer (150; [0035]) over the switching layer;
forming a capping layer (160; [0036]-[0037]) over the metal diffusion barrier layer; and
forming a top electrode (170; [0044]) over the capping layer.
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) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tseng in view of US 2015/0263279 A1 (hereinafter “Hayakawa”).
Regarding claim 6, Tseng discloses the semiconductor device of Claim 1.
Tseng does not disclose the bottom electrode has a first portion and a second portion surrounding the first portion, and a thickness of the first portion is greater than a thickness of the second portion.
Hayakawa teaches in Fig. 1 and related text the bottom electrode (110; [0085]) has a first portion and a second portion surrounding the first portion, and a thickness of the first portion is greater than a thickness of the second portion.
Tseng and Hayakawa are analogous art because they both are directed to resistive memory and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Tseng with the specified features of Hayakawa because they are from the same field of endeavor.
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 bottom electrode to have a first portion and a second portion surrounding the first portion, wherein a thickness of the first portion is greater than a thickness of the second portion, as taught by Hayakawa, in order to improve the reliability of an electrical connection between the bottom electrode and an underlying contact plug while maintaining the planarity of the top surface of the bottom electrode (Hayakawa: [0085]). (Tseng discloses in [0022]: “the semiconductor substrate 110 may include a multilayer interconnect structure formed from metal layers and dielectric layers, a redistribution layer, other electrical connection structures, or a combination thereof.”)
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tseng in view of US 2014/0192589 A1 (hereinafter “Maxwell”).
Regarding claim 20, Tseng discloses the method of Claim 17.
Tseng does not disclose forming a passivation layer over the bottom electrode.
Maxwell teaches in Fig. 2 and related text forming a passivation layer (214) over the bottom electrode (206).
Tseng and Maxwell are analogous art because they both are directed to resistive memory and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Tseng with the specified features of Maxwell because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to form a passivation layer over the bottom electrode, as taught by Maxwell, in order to reduce or avoid oxidation of layers of the memory cell, thereby improving endurance, longevity and/or memory retention (Maxwell: [0040]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-9, 11 and 13-16 are allowed.
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 metal diffusion barrier layer has a first top surface and a second top surface surrounding the first top surface, and the first top surface is lower than the second top surface” as recited in claim 7.
Claims 10 and 12 would be allowable if amended to overcome the objections set forth in this Office action.
Claims 18 and 19 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 “patterning the top electrode, the capping layer, the metal diffusion barrier layer, the switching layer and the bottom electrode such that a width of the bottom electrode is greater than a width of the capping layer, greater than a width of the metal diffusion barrier layer, and greater than a width of the top electrode” as recited in claim 18.Claim 19 depends from claim 18 and therefore would be allowable at least by virtue of its dependency.
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