DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 19 March 2025 has been entered.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of the Invention II Claims 1-17 in the reply filed on 24 May 2024 is acknowledged. Accordingly, claims 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 9 March 2026 have been fully considered, but are not persuasive.
Applicant states:
According to the January 21 interview, agreements were reached that the abovementioned amendments to Claims 1, 13 and 21 can overcome the current prior art rejections. Therefore, Applicant respectfully submits that rejections of Claims 1, 13 and 21 be withdrawn.
Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment (filed 9 March 2026) at 3. The Examiner respectfully notes that only those proposed amendments to claim 1 appearing in the Office Action Appendix attached to the Examiner Interview Summary Record (PTOL-413) mailed 23 January 2026 were discussed. At no point before, during, or after the interview did Applicant provide any proposed claim amendments to independent claims 13 or 21. At no point before, during, or after the interview the interview did Applicant and the Examiner discuss proposed claim amendments regarding independent claims 13 and 21. At no point before, during, or after the interview the interview did Applicant and the Examiner reach any agreement regarding currently amended independent claims 13 and 21.
Moreover, the Examiner respectfully asserts that Applicant did not fully incorporate the proposed amendments to claim 1 appearing in the Office Action Appendix attached to the Examiner Interview Summary Record (PTOL-413) mailed 23 January 2026, and thus even if an agreement regarding that specific claim language had been reached, such agreement would be moot. Namely, Applicant amended claim 1 and deleted the “iterating a loop of” limitation, which was a point of significant contention and discussion in the Final Rejection mailed 17 November 2025 and during the interview, as reflected in the Examiner Interview Summary Record mailed 23 January 2026.
The Examiner respectfully asserts that all of the limitations of currently amended claims 13-17 and 21-23 are disclosed in the prior art rejections of those claims, below.
Accordingly, Applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive.
Drawings
The objections to the drawings are withdraw, responsive to Applicant’s amendment of the claims.
Claim Objections
The objection to claim 13 is withdrawn, responsive to Applicant’s amendment of claim 13.
New objections to the claims appear below.
Claim 15 is further objected to:
Claim 15 contains a typo and should read: “are individually controlled by a plurality of controllers”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The rejections of claims 1, 13, and 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) are withdrawn, responsive to Applicant’s amendment of claims 1, 13, and 21.
New rejections under § 112(b) appear below.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the temperature.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 14-17, which depend from claim 13, are rejected under § 112(b) for at least the same reasons as claim 13.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 13, 15-17, 21, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 8,182,709 (filed June 4, 2008) (hereinafter “Heinrich”) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2014/000462 (filed June 30, 2012) (hereinafter “Xu”) and U.S. Patent No. 6,567,718 (filed July 28, 2000) (hereinafter “Campbell”).
Regarding independent claim 13, Heinrich discloses: A method for forming a semiconductor structure, comprising:
transferring a substrate onto a platen (see FIG. 2b depicting a CMP process wherein the substrate 250 is received by the CMP tool 200 and transferred onto a platen; Col. 12 Lines 19-21 “During operation of the polishing tool 200, the substrate 250 may be attached to the polishing head 203 and may be placed on the polishing pad 202 . . . .”);
mounting the substrate to a polishing head with a side of the substrate facing a polishing pad (see FIG. 2c depicting the CMP tool 200 of the CMP process depicted in FIG. 2b wherein the substrate 250 is mounted to the polishing head 203 with a side of the substrate 250 facing a polishing pad 202);
engaging the polishing head to the polishing pad to grind the substrate (see FIG. 2d depicting the CMP tool 200 of FIG. 2b in use wherein the substrate 250 is attached to the polishing head 203 and placed on the polishing pad 202 to create a substrate 250 having a reduced layer 251R having “a thickness profile related to the target temperature profile or removal rate profile used by the controller.” Col. 9, Lines 15-16; “During the polishing operation, typically a slurry that may include a chemically reactive agent and possibly abrasive particles is supplied to the surface of the polishing pad.” Col. 2 Lines 9-12);
grinding the substrate with the polishing pad (FIG. 2d, depicting the CMP tool 200 of FIG. 2b in use wherein the substrate 250 is attached to the polishing head 203 and placed on the polishing pad 202 to create a substrate 250 having a reduced layer 251R having “a thickness profile related to the target temperature profile or removal rate profile used by the controller.” Col. 9, Lines 15-16; “Typically, the removal rate may be determined by process parameters, such as the relative speed of the Surface to be polished and the polishing pad, the down force with which the Substrate is pressed against the polishing pad, the type of slurry used and the mechanical characteristics of the polishing pad in combination with any abrasive particles.” Col. 2, Lines 13-18);
Heinrich does not specifically disclose a step of
at a first instant, generating a first thickness profile of the substrate;
measuring a temperature distribution of the polishing pad;
adjusting the temperature distribution of the polishing pad in response to the first thickness profile of the substrate and the temperature distribution;
at a second time instant, generating a second thickness profile of the substrate based after the adjusting of the temperature distribution of the polishing pad; and
generating a thickness difference based on the first thickness profile and the second thickness profile; and
replacing the polishing pad with a new polishing pad in response to the thickness difference failing to meet a specification.
In the same field of endeavor, Xu discloses
grinding the substrate with the polishing pad (FIG. 6, step 606, depicting polishing the substrate with the polishing surface of the polishing pad, [0074]);
at a first time instant (FIG. 6, step 612, depicting a first instant), generating a first thickness profile of the substrate (FIG. 6, step 612, depicting wherein the thickness of the layer being removed from the substrate is measured at various regions to determine the profile of the layer, [0080]-[0081]);
measuring a temperature distribution of the polishing pad (FIG. 6, step 616, depicting wherein the temperature of the polishing surface of the polishing pad is measured, [0073], [0078], [0086]);
adjusting the temperature distribution of the polishing pad through zone-based heating on the platen by a plurality of heating elements in response to the first thickness profile of the substrate and the temperature (FIGS. 6/7, step 624, depicting wherein the temperature of the polishing surface of the polishing pad is adjusted such that polishing is performed at a removal rate having a lower temperature based on achievement of an endpoint value of a thickness profile of the layer being removed, [0089]; step 628, depicting wherein the temperature of the polishing surface of the polishing pad would be adjusted by a rate quench based on a monitored temperature of the polishing pad, [0093]);
at a second time instant (FIG. 6, step 630, depicting a second time instant), generating a second thickness profile of the substrate after the adjusting of the temperature distribution of the polishing pad (FIG. 6, step 630, depicting wherein the thickness of the layer being removed from the substrate is measured at various regions to determine the profile of the layer, [0080]-[0081], [0088], [0094]).
Regarding the implementation of the feedback loop utilized in a CMP process depicted in FIG. 6, in [0021], Xu states: “the apparatus and methods described below are directed towards controlling the average temperature and reducing temperature variation during CMP planarization of substrates, particularly towards a target temperature that improves planarization. The described methods and apparatus lead to improved planarization efficacy during CMP of substrates, with reduced side-effects such as erosion and dishing.”
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of forming a semiconductor structure of Heinrich by adding the CMP method loop steps of FIG. 6 of Xu such that the temperature adjustment step disclosed in Xu is accomplished by adjusting the temperatures of first and second regions of the polishing pad of Heinrich in order to improve planarization efficacy with reduced side-effects. See Xu [0021].
Moreover, addition of the CMP method loop steps of FIG. 6 of Xu to the semiconductor structure of Heinrich would result in a method wherein the step of adjusting the temperature distribution of the polishing pad would be accomplished through zone-based heating on the platen by a plurality of heating elements in response to the first thickness profile of the substrate and the temperature (Heinrich FIG. 2d; Xu FIGS. 6/7; step 628, depicting wherein the temperature of the polishing surface of the polishing pad would be adjusted by “zone-based heating” on the platen 209 of Heinrich, the “zone” comprising a plurality of temperature zones 201A-C, heated or cooled together; “[T]he upper side of each of the elements 401G may be heated or cooled to establish the desired overall temperature profile.” Heinrich Col. 15, Lines 50-53).
Neither Heinrich nor Xu specifically disclose the steps of generating a thickness difference based on the first thickness profile and the second thickness profile; and replacing the polishing pad with a new polishing pad in response to the thickness difference failing to meet a specification.
In the same field of endeavor, Campbell discloses generating a thickness difference (Figure 2, depicting a flow diagram of a method for monitoring consumable performance including block 240, depicting a step of determining an actual processing rate, i.e., a difference between a first thickness and a second thickness of a processing tool 130 via metrology tools 120, 140, Col. 3, Lines 42-50: “Referring now to FIG. 1, a simplified diagram of a portion of an illustrative processing line 100 for processing wafers 110 in accordance with the present invention is provided. The processing line 100 includes a pre-process metrology tool 120, a processing tool 130, a post-process metrology tool 140, and an automatic process controller 150. The processing tool 130 employs a consumable item that exhibits degrading performance over time. Exemplary consumable items include polishing pads and carriers on a chemical mechanical polishing (CMP) tool,” wherein the metrology tools 120, 140 measure the thickness of a layer to determine the polishing rate of the processing tool, Cols. 3-4, Lines 64-67, 1-2) based on a first thickness profile and a second thickness profile (Figure 2, block 240, depicting wherein the actual processing rate of the processing tool 130 is determined, Col. 6, Lines 41-44: “In block 240, the actual processing rate of the processing tool 130 is determined on a periodic basis by the metrology tools 120, 140 to provide feedback for the performance model.”); and
replacing the polishing pad with a new polishing pad (Figure 2, block 250, depicting wherein the replacement interval for a consumable item, i.e., a polishing pad, is determined based on the determined actual processing rate, Col. 6, Lines 44-47: “In block 250, the replacement interval for the consumable item is determined based on the actual processing rate. In one embodiment, the predicted processing rate may also be used in determining the replacement interval.”) in response to the thickness difference failing to meet a specification (Figure 2, block 250, depicting in at least one embodiment, wherein a discrepancy between an actual processing rate and a predicted processing rate may indicate failure of the consumable, necessitating replacement, Col. 5, Lines 23-28: “A discrepancy between the actual processing rate and the predicted processing rate may indicate a difference in the actual degradation rate of the particular consumable item being employed. This discrepancy might indicate a premature failure or an opportunity for extending the service life of the consumable item”).
Regarding the implementation of the method for monitoring consumable performance depicted in Figure 2, in Col. 6, Lines 52-60, Campbell states: “Determining the replacement intervals for consumable items using the modeling and actual measurement techniques described above improves the efficiency of the processing line 100 and the efficiency at which the consumable items are used. The service life of better-performing consumables will be extended without losing the ability to identify poorer-performing consumable items prior to failure. This improves efficiency at both the tool level and the line level.”
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of forming a semiconductor structure of Heinrich and Xu by adding the steps disclosed in Campbell including (1) generating a thickness difference (i.e., a step of determining the actual processing rate disclosed in Campbell, noted above) using the measured first thickness profile and second thickness profile as disclosed in Xu, and (2) replacing the polishing pad with a new polishing pad (i.e., a step of determining a replacement interval for the polishing pad consumable disclosed in Campbell, noted above) in response to the thickness difference failing to meet a specification (i.e., the specification being a discrepancy between the actual processing rate and the predicted processing rate) in order to improve the efficiency of the processing line and the efficiency at which consumable items such as polishing pads are used. See Campbell Col. 6, Lines 52-60.
Regarding claim 15, Heinrich in view of Xu and Campbell further discloses wherein plurality of heating elements (see Heinrich FIG. 4b depicting the platen 409 used in the CMP process having temperature zones 401 A-C “defined by electrically driven heating elements 401F. . . to establish the desired temperature profile.” Col. 14, Lines 64- 67) are individually controlled by a plurality of controller (FIG. 2b/4b, depicting wherein the temperature profile is controlled by a controller 202 and various elements including temperature adjustment unit 401, heating elements 401F, Col. 8 Lines 60-65; Col. 14, Lines 61-67).
Regarding claim 16, Heinrich in view of Xu and Campbell further discloses measuring an initial thickness profile of the substrate (see Heinrich FIG. 2b depicting a CMP process wherein controller 202 receives pre-polishing measurement data 253 that may “represent thickness measurement data indicating an initial thickness profile of the layer 251,” Col. 9, Lines 23-26, and/or “respective thickness profile data of the reduced layer 251R [that] may be contained in the post-polishing measurement data 254.” Col. 9, Lines 48-50).
Regarding claim 17, Heinrich in view of Xu and Campbell further discloses adjusting the temperature distribution of the polishing pad in response to the initial thickness profile of the substrate prior to the grinding of the substrate with the polishing pad (see Heinrich FIG. 2b depicting a CMP process wherein controller 202 receives pre-polishing measurement data 253 that may “represent thickness measurement data indicating an initial thickness profile of the layer 251,” Col. 9, Lines 23-26; “For example, as previously explained, when the measurement data 253 indicate a significant non-uniformity of the material layer 251 and a substantially uniform reduced layer thickness, as desired, the controller 202 may determine an appropriate target temperature profile by determining a local difference of the removal rates required to obtain the desired process output for an estimated total polishing time.” Col. 9, Lines 30-37.).
Regarding independent claim 21, Heinrich discloses: A method for forming a semiconductor structure, comprising:
transferring a substrate onto a platen (see FIG. 2b depicting a CMP process wherein the substrate 250 is received by the CMP tool 200 and transferred onto a platen; Col. 12 Lines 19-21 “During operation of the polishing tool 200, the substrate 250 may be attached to the polishing head 203 and may be placed on the polishing pad 202 . . . .”);
mounting the substrate to a polishing head with a side of the substrate facing a polishing pad (see FIG. 2c depicting the CMP tool 200 of the CMP process depicted in FIG. 2b wherein the substrate 250 is mounted to the polishing head 203 with a side of the substrate 250 facing a polishing pad 202),
the substrate comprising a first region and a second region (see FIG. 2d depicting the CMP tool 200 of FIG. 2b in use wherein the substrate 250 comprises a center region 250C and a peripheral region around the center region 250C),
and the polishing pad comprising a third region and a fourth region corresponding to the first region and the second region, respectively (in the embodiment shown, the substrate 250 may be positioned such that a center 250C thereof is positioned in the temperature zone 201B, while peripheral areas of the substrate 250 may periodically come into contact with the temperature zones 201A, 201C upon rotation of the substrate 250.” Col. 12, Lines 45-50);
grinding the substrate with the polishing pad (see FIG. 2d depicting the CMP tool 200 of FIG. 2b in use wherein the substrate 250 is attached to the polishing head 203 and placed on the polishing pad 202 to create a substrate 250 having a reduced layer 25 1R; “Typically, the removal rate may be determined by process parameters, such as the relative speed of the surface to be polished and the polishing pad, the down force with which the substrate is pressed against the polishing pad, the type of slurry used and the mechanical characteristics of the polishing pad in combination with any abrasive particles.” Col. 2, Lines 13-18).
While Heinrich discloses a step of in response to the first region having a greater removal rate than the second region, adjusting a first temperature of the third region to be less than a second temperature of the fourth region (see FIG. 2d depicting the CMP tool 200 of FIG. 2b in use, and further wherein the temperatures of the temperature zones 201A-C are adjusted during polishing in response to thermal responsive behavior of the zones and the polishing pad, and further wherein the temperature of zone 201B may be adjusted to a higher value than zones 201A or 201C; “Depending on the overall thermal response behavior of the temperature zones 201A, 201B, 201C, in other cases, the temperature may be varied in a dynamic manner, for example, between individual substrates or within the polishing process of a single substrate, possibly in combination with a variation of the radial position of the substrate 250, so as to obtain the desired temperature profile 320.” Col. 13, Lines 55-61; “If, for instance, a temperature profile is desired in which temperature in the center 250C may be higher compared to the peripheral areas of the substrate 250, the temperature of the zone 201B may be adjusted to a appropriately selected high value, while the temperatures in the zones 201 A, 201C may be maintained at a lower level.” Col. 12, Lines 50-55), Heinrich does not specifically disclose a step of:
during the grinding, performing operations of:
at a first time instant, measuring a first temperature of the third region and a second temperature of the fourth region;
generating a first thickness profile of the substrate at the first time instant;
determining a first removal rate of the first region and a second removal rate of the second region;
in response to the first removal rate different from that of the second removal rate,
adjusting, through zone-based heating on the platen by a plurality of heating elements, the first temperature of the third region to be different from the second temperature of the fourth region based on the first removal rate, the second removal rate, the first temperature of the third region and second the temperature of the fourth region at the first time instant;
at a second time instant, generating a second thickness profile of the substrate; and
generating a thickness difference based on the first thickness profile and the second thickness profile; and
replacing the polishing pad with a new polishing pad in response to the thickness difference failing to meet a specification.
In the same field of endeavor, Xu discloses a step of, during the grinding of the substrate (FIG. 6, step 606, describing wherein the steps are performed during the polishing of the substrate), iterating a loop (FIG. 6, depicting wherein each step is performed at least twice) of:
at a first time instant (FIG. 6, step 608, depicting a first time instant), measuring a temperature of the polishing pad (FIG. 6, step 608, depicting wherein the temperature of the polishing surface of the polishing pad is measured, [0073], [0078]);
generating a first thickness profile of the substrate at the first time instant (FIG. 6, step 612, depicting wherein the thickness of the layer being removed from the substrate is measured at various regions to determine the profile of the layer, [0080]-[0081]);
determining a removal rate of the polishing pad and in response to the removal rate, adjusting the temperature of the polishing pad based on the removal rate of the polishing pad, and the temperature of the polishing pad at the first time instant (FIGS. 6/7, step 614, depicting wherein the temperature of the polishing surface of the polishing pad is adjusted such that polishing is performed at a second removal rate having a lower temperature based on achievement of an endpoint value of a thickness profile of the layer being removed, [0084]; step 610, depicting wherein the temperature of the polishing surface of the polishing pad is adjusted by a rate quench based on a monitored temperature of the polishing pad, [0079], and responsive to a removal rate of the polishing pad, [0079]);
at a second time instant (FIG. 6, step 620, depicting a second time instant), generating a second thickness profile of the substrate (FIG. 6, step 620, depicting wherein the thickness of the layer being removed from the substrate is measured at various regions to determine the profile of the layer, [0080]-[0081], [0088]);
Regarding the implementation of the feedback loop utilized in a CMP process depicted in FIG. 6, in [0021], Xu states: “the apparatus and methods described below are directed towards controlling the average temperature and reducing temperature variation during CMP planarization of substrates, particularly towards a target temperature that improves planarization. The described methods and apparatus lead to improved planarization efficacy during CMP of substrates, with reduced side-effects such as erosion and dishing.”
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of forming a semiconductor structure of Heinrich by adding the CMP method loop steps of FIG. 6 of Xu such that the temperature adjustment and measurement steps of the polishing pad, as well as the removal rate determination steps of the substrate disclosed in Xu is accomplished by measuring and adjusting the temperatures of third and fourth regions of the polishing pad of Heinrich and by calculating the removal rates of the first and second regions of the substrate of Heinrich in order to improve planarization efficacy with reduced side-effects. See Xu [0021].
Moreover, addition of the CMP method loop steps of FIG. 6 of Xu to the semiconductor structure of Heinrich would result in a method wherein the step of adjusting the temperature distribution of the polishing pad would be accomplished through zone-based heating on the platen by a plurality of heating elements in response to the first thickness profile of the substrate and the temperature (Heinrich FIG. 2d; Xu FIGS. 6/7; step 628, depicting wherein the temperature of the polishing surface of the polishing pad would be adjusted by “zone-based heating” on the platen 209 of Heinrich, the “zone” comprising a plurality of temperature zones 201A-C, heated or cooled together; “[T]he upper side of each of the elements 401G may be heated or cooled to establish the desired overall temperature profile.” Heinrich Col. 15, Lines 50-53).
Neither Heinrich nor Xu specifically disclose the steps of generating a thickness difference based on the first thickness profile and the second thickness profile; and replacing the polishing pad with a new polishing pad in response to the thickness difference failing to meet a specification.
In the same field of endeavor, Campbell discloses generating a thickness difference (Figure 2, depicting a flow diagram of a method for monitoring consumable performance including block 240, depicting a step of determining an actual processing rate, i.e., a difference between a first thickness and a second thickness of a processing tool 130 via metrology tools 120, 140, Col. 3, Lines 42-50: “Referring now to FIG. 1, a simplified diagram of a portion of an illustrative processing line 100 for processing wafers 110 in accordance with the present invention is provided. The processing line 100 includes a pre-process metrology tool 120, a processing tool 130, a post-process metrology tool 140, and an automatic process controller 150. The processing tool 130 employs a consumable item that exhibits degrading performance over time. Exemplary consumable items include polishing pads and carriers on a chemical mechanical polishing (CMP) tool,” wherein the metrology tools 120, 140 measure the thickness of a layer to determine the polishing rate of the processing tool, Cols. 3-4, Lines 64-67, 1-2) based on a first thickness profile and a second thickness profile (Figure 2, block 240, depicting wherein the actual processing rate of the processing tool 130 is determined, Col. 6, Lines 41-44: “In block 240, the actual processing rate of the processing tool 130 is determined on a periodic basis by the metrology tools 120, 140 to provide feedback for the performance model.”); and
replacing the polishing pad with a new polishing pad (Figure 2, block 250, depicting wherein the replacement interval for a consumable item, i.e., a polishing pad, is determined based on the determined actual processing rate, Col. 6, Lines 44-47: “In block 250, the replacement interval for the consumable item is determined based on the actual processing rate. In one embodiment, the predicted processing rate may also be used in determining the replacement interval.”) in response to the thickness difference failing to meet a specification (Figure 2, block 250, depicting in at least one embodiment, wherein a discrepancy between an actual processing rate and a predicted processing rate may indicate failure of the consumable, necessitating replacement, Col. 5, Lines 23-28: “A discrepancy between the actual processing rate and the predicted processing rate may indicate a difference in the actual degradation rate of the particular consumable item being employed. This discrepancy might indicate a premature failure or an opportunity for extending the service life of the consumable item”).
Regarding the implementation of the method for monitoring consumable performance depicted in Figure 2, in Col. 6, Lines 52-60, Campbell states: “Determining the replacement intervals for consumable items using the modeling and actual measurement techniques described above improves the efficiency of the processing line 100 and the efficiency at which the consumable items are used. The service life of better-performing consumables will be extended without losing the ability to identify poorer-performing consumable items prior to failure. This improves efficiency at both the tool level and the line level.”
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of forming a semiconductor structure of Heinrich and Xu by adding the steps disclosed in Campbell including (1) generating a thickness difference (i.e., a step of determining the actual processing rate disclosed in Campbell, noted above) using the measured first thickness profile and second thickness profile as disclosed in Xu, and (2) replacing the polishing pad with a new polishing pad (i.e., a step of determining a replacement interval for the polishing pad consumable disclosed in Campbell, noted above) in response to the thickness difference failing to meet a specification (i.e., the specification being a discrepancy between the actual processing rate and the predicted processing rate) in order to improve the efficiency of the processing line and the efficiency at which consumable items such as polishing pads are used. See Campbell Col. 6, Lines 52-60.
Regarding claim 22, Heinrich in view of Xu and Campbell further discloses wherein the first region and the second region are concentric rings from a center of the substrate to a periphery of the substrate (see Heinrich FIG. 2d depicting the CMP tool 200 of FIG. 2b in use wherein the substrate 250 comprises a center region 250C and a peripheral region concentrically surrounding the center region 250C).
Claims 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Heinrich in view of Xu and Campbell, and further in view of Japanese Patent Publication No. JP2017216481A (published Dec. 7, 2017) (hereinafter “Itsuki”).
Regarding claim 14, Heinrich in view of Xu and Campbell does not specifically disclose wherein the measuring of the planarity of the surface being polished of the substrate is performed by a measurement unit disposed in the polishing pad, and the measurement unit is arranged in a place where the measurement unit crosses a center of the substrate as the polishing pad rotates.
In the same field of endeavor, Itsuki discloses a measurement unit (FIGS. 6/7, depicting a polishing apparatus including an optical film thickness measuring part, Page 5, [0037]: “The optical film thickness measuring section includes light sources 16 a and 16 b for emitting light, a first light projecting section 11 a for irradiating the surface of the substrate W with light emitted from the light source 16 a, reflected light returning from the substrate W A second light projecting section 11b for irradiating the surface of the substrate W with the light emitted from the light source 16b, a second light receiving section 11b for receiving the reflected light returning from the substrate W A spectroscope 14a, 14b for decomposing the reflected light from the substrate W in accordance with the wavelength and measuring the intensity of the reflected light over a predetermined wavelength range, and a spectroscope 14a, 14b for analyzing the spectrum from the measurement data acquired by the spectroscope 14a, 14b And a processing unit 15 for determining the film thickness of the substrate W on the basis of this spectrum.”) disposed in the polishing pad (FIGS. 6/7, depicting wherein the optical film thickness includes portions, e.g., openings 31A and 31B, disposed in the polishing table 20 and the polishing pad 22), and the measurement unit (FIGS. 6/7, depicting a polishing apparatus including an optical film thickness measuring part) is arranged in a place where the measurement unit crosses a center of the substrate as the polishing pad rotates (FIGS. 6/7, depicting wherein the polishing table 20, polishing pad 22, and substrate W are arranged such that the first optical film thickness measuring head 13A will cross a center of the substrate W as each of the polishing table 20, polishing pad 22, and substrate W rotate; Page 6 [0041]: “[A]s shown in FIG. 4 (a), each time the polishing table 20 rotates, the tips of the first light projecting portion 11 a and the first light receiving portion 12 a move across the substrate W, and the center of the substrate W Is irradiated with light. This is because the film thickness of the entire surface of the substrate W including the film thickness at the central portion of the substrate W is measured by the first light projecting portion 11 a and the first light receiving portion 12 a passing through the center of the substrate W is there. The processing unit 15 can generate a film thickness profile (film thickness distribution) based on the measured film thickness data.”). Regarding the optical thickness measurement unit, in [0010], Itsuki states: “[T]he present invention provide[s] a polishing apparatus capable of acquiring film thickness data with high accuracy on the entire surface including the central portion and the peripheral portion of a substrate.”
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of forming a semiconductor structure of Heinrich, Xu, and Campbell by adding the optical film thickness measuring part of Itsuki in order to provide film thickness data with high accuracy over the entire surface of the substrate. See Itsuki [0041].
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Heinrich in view Xu and Campbell, and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 6,682,404 (filed May 10, 2001) (hereinafter “Brunelli’’).
Regarding Claim 23, Heinrich in view of Xu and Campbell discloses wherein the grinding is performed in a chamber (the CMP tool 200 of the CMP process comprises “an appropriate process chamber including a polishing platen and a polishing head.” Col. 8, Lines 47-49). Heinrich does not, however, disclose controlling a temperature uniformity within the chamber.
In the same field of endeavor, Brunelli discloses a CMP method including using a temperature controller to regulate the temperature within an insulated enclosure in order to uniformly heat the environment within the enclosure as well as the planarizing surface of the polishing pad (See Col. 8, Lines 24-48).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the disclosed method step of performing grinding in a chamber disclosed in Heinrich with the temperature regulation of Brunelli in order to uniformly heating the environment within the enclosure and planarizing surface of the polishing pad.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-12 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 1: The primary reason for the allowance of the claims is the inclusion of a step of “individually adjusting at least one of the temperature of the first region and the temperature of the second region based on the temperature of the first region, the temperature of the second region and the first thickness profile through zone-based heating on the platen by a plurality of heating elements” in combination with the remaining features of independent claim 1. Claims 2-12, which depend from claim 1, contain allowable subject matter and are allowed for the same reasons as claim 1.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM D WEILAND whose telephone number is (703)756-4760. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am-5pm.
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, Steven Gauthier can be reached at (571)270-0373. 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.
/ADAM D WEILAND/Examiner, Art Unit 2813
/STEVEN B GAUTHIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2813
Prosecution Insights