Ex Parte Flachowsky et alDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardJul 26, 201613345922 (P.T.A.B. Jul. 26, 2016) Copy Citation UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE 13/345,922 01109/2012 10742 7590 07/28/2016 GLOBALFOUNDRIES INC. c/o Amerson Law Firm, PLLC 2500 Fondren Road, Suite 220 Houston, TX 77063 FIRST NAMED INVENTOR Stefan Flachowsky UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www .uspto.gov ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 2 l 62.206500/CD08 l 1977 EXAMINER HOSSAIN, MOAZZAM ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2898 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 07/28/2016 ELECTRONIC Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication. Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the following e-mail address( es): uspto@amersoniplaw.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte STEP AN FLACHOWSKY, JAN HOENTSCHEL, and THILO SCHEIPER Appeal2015-001933 Application 13/345,922 Technology Center 2800 Before TERRY J. OWENS, MICHAEL P. COLAIANNI, and LiLANREN Administrative Patent Judges. OWENS, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE The Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner's rejection of claims 1---6, 8-12, 17, 18, and 20-22. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b ). The Invention The Appellants claim a method for forming a metal silicide region on a transistor's source/drain region. Claim 1 is illustrative: 1. A method of forming a metal silicide region on a source/ drain region of a transistor, wherein said metal silicide region has a target thickness, the method comprising: Appeal2015-001933 Application 13/345,922 Ko forming an upper portion of said source/drain region that is positioned above an uppermost surface of a semiconducting substrate, said upper portion of said source/ drain region having an upper surface that is positioned above said uppermost surface of said substrate by a distance that is at least equal to said target thickness of said metal silicide region; and forming said metal silicide region in a portion of said upper portions of said source/ drain region, wherein said metal silicide region has a bottom surface positioned above said uppermost surface of said substrate. Lang do Kammler Zhu The References US 2005/0035409 Al US 2005/0176204 Al US 2006/0003533 Al US 2007 /0018252 Al Feb. 17,2005 Aug. 11, 2005 Jan. 5,2006 Jan.25,2007 The Rejections The claims stand rejected as follows: claims 1---6 and 8 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) over Kammler, claims 9, 17, and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Kammler, claims 10 and 11under35 U.S.C. § 103 over Kammler in view of Langdo, claims 12 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Kammler in view of Zhu, claim 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Kammler in view of Ko, and claim 22 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Kammler in view of Ko and Zhu. OPINION We reverse the rejections. We need address only the independent claims (1, 8, 17, and 21 ). Those claims require a transistor comprising a metal silicide region having a bottom surface positioned above the uppermost surface of a substrate. To meet that claim requirement the Examiner relies upon Kammler (Final Act. 3-18). 2 Appeal2015-001933 Application 13/345,922 "Anticipation requires that every limitation of the claim in issue be disclosed, either expressly or under principles of inherency, in a single prior art reference." Corning Glass Works v. Sumitomo Elec. U.S.A., Inc., 868 F.2d 1251, 1255-56 (Fed. Cir. 1989). Establishing a prima facie case of obviousness requires an apparent reason to modify the prior art as proposed by the Examiner. See KSR Int'! Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 418 (2007). Kammler discloses a transistor (200) comprising an epitaxially grown silicon layer (213) above source and drain regions (210) in a substrate (201)'s active region (203) (i-f 27; Fig. 2a). A region including the silicon layer (213) is substantially amorphized by ion implantation (240) and recrystallized by annealing (i-f 28), and then "the process sequence may be continued by forming corresponding metal silicide regions (not shown) by well-established processes" (i-f 30). The Examiner asserts that Kammler's ion-implanted silicon layer (213) is a pre-metal silicide layer and that "Kammler's Figure 2b depicts the post 'metal silicide formed' doped epitaxial layer 213" (Ans. 5- 6). Kammler's Figure 2b shows the ion-implanted silicon layer (213) as being above the substrate (201)'s active region (203)'s source and drain regions (210). Kammler, however, discloses that Figure 2b shows the ion-implanted silicon layer (213) after recrystallization, not after the formation of metal silicide regions which, Kammler states, are not shown (i-f 30). Thus, the Examiner's finding of anticipation and conclusion of obviousness are based upon an incorrect interpretation of Kammler. 3 Appeal2015-001933 Application 13/345,922 The Examiner has not established that Kammler discloses, expressly or inherently, a metal silicide region having a bottom surface positioned above the uppermost surface of a substrate, or established that Kammler would have provided one of ordinary skill in the art with an apparent reason to form such a metal silicide region. The Examiner, therefore, has not set forth a prima facie case of anticipation or obviousness of the Appellants' claimed method. Accordingly, we reverse the rejections. DECISION/ORDER The rejections of claims 1---6 and 8 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) over Kammler, claims 9, 17 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Kammler, claims 10 and 11under35 U.S.C. § 103 over Kammler in view ofLangdo, claims 12 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Kammler in view of Zhu, claim 21under35 U.S.C. § 103 over Kammler in view of Ko, and claim 22 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Kammler in view of Ko and Zhu are reversed. It is ordered that the Examiner's decision is reversed. REVERSED 4 Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation