DETAILED ACTION
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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicants’ submission filed on 21 JAN 2026 has been entered.
Response To Final Rejection Office Action
The 14 JAN 2026 amendments to claims 1, 20, and 23 have been entered.
The 14 JAN 2026 cancellation of claim 19 has been entered.
The 14 JAN 2026 addition of claim 24 has been entered.
Claim Objections
The following claim language lacks sufficient antecedent basis (MPEP § 2173.05(e)) or includes a typographical error.
Claim 20, line 8-9, replace “boride,;” with “boride;”.
Appropriate correction is required.
New Grounds of Rejection
A new ground of rejection, prior art reference Bojarczuk, JR. et al. (US 20060102968), appears below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
See previous Office action for a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 102.
Claims 1, 4, 9-12, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Clark (US 20130256803; below, “Clark” – previously cited).
RE 1, Clark, in FIGS. 2A to 2D and related text, e.g., Abstract, paragraphs [0001] to [0117], claims 1-20, discloses a method for depositing a threshold voltage shifting layer (108[Wingdings font/0xE0]112, 122), the method comprising the steps of:
PNG
media_image1.png
856
510
media_image1.png
Greyscale
providing a substrate (100+110) within a reactor chamber (10), the substrate (100+110) comprising a surface, the surface comprising a silicon oxide surface (110 is thermally modified interface layer 102), the silicon oxide surface comprising SiO2 (e.g., [0018], [0024]);
depositing a threshold voltage shifting layer (112, 122) onto the silicon oxide surface (110) by means of a cyclical deposition process ([0027]);
wherein the threshold voltage shifting layer (112, 122) comprises a material selected from a lanthanide boride, a lanthanide sulfide, yttrium boride, yttrium sulfide, scandium boride, and a scandium chalcogenide (e.g., [0026], [0040] - scandium(III) oxide);
wherein the cyclical deposition process comprises one or more cycles comprising:
providing (e.g., [0102]) a precursor (e.g., [0068]) to the reaction chamber (10) in a precursor pulse; and
providing (e.g., [0102]) a reactant (e.g., [0057], [0084], [0110]) to the reaction chamber (10) in a reactant pulse;
thus forming a threshold voltage shifting layer (112, 122) on the substrate (100+110).
Hence, Clark anticipates this claim.
RE 4, Clark discloses the method according to claim 1 wherein the threshold voltage shifting layer (112, 122) comprises a scandium chalcogenide, and wherein the reactant comprises a chalcogenide (e.g., [0026], [0057], [0110]).
RE 9, Clark discloses the method according to claim 1 wherein the threshold voltage shifting layer (112, 122) comprises cerium, and wherein the precursor comprises a cerium precursor (e.g., [0065]).
RE 10, Clark discloses the method according to claim 9 wherein the cerium precursor is selected from the list consisting of cerium diketonates, cerium amidinates, cerium cyclopentadienyls, cerium alkoxides, and cerium alkylsilylamines (e.g., [0065]).
RE 11, Clark discloses the method according to claim 9 wherein the threshold voltage shifting layer (112, 122) comprises a cerium chalcogenide, and wherein the reactant is a chalcogenide reactant comprising a chalcogen (e.g., [0026], [0040], [0057], [0110]).
RE 12, Clark discloses the method according to claim 11 wherein the threshold voltage shifting layer (112, 122) comprises cerium oxide, and wherein the chalcogenide reactant is an oxygen reactant selected from the list consisting of H2O, O3, H2O2, O2, oxygen radicals, and oxygen ions (e.g., [0026], [0040], [0057], [0110]).
RE 17, Clark discloses the method according to claim 1 wherein the threshold voltage shifting layer (112, 122) has a thickness from at least 0.03 nm to at most 1.0 nm (e.g., [0027], [0041]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
See previous Office action for a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Clark with evidence from and/or in view of ROMERO (US 20190202842; below, “ROMERO” – previously cited 18 NOV 2021 IDS noted prior art reference). MPEP § 2143(A)-(G).
RE 7, Clark is silent regarding the method according to claim 1 wherein the threshold voltage shifting layer (112, 122) comprises scandium sulfide, and wherein the reactant comprises a sulfur reactant.
ROMERO, in Abstract, paragraphs [0001] to [0041], claims 1-19, teaches scandium sulfide (Abstract, [0010]), and wherein the reactant comprises a sulfur reactant (e.g., [0018], [0040], claims 15, 18).
Clark and ROMERO are analogous art from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Clark as taught by ROMERO because: 1. a more robust and forgiving layer forming process including films of scandium(III) oxide or scandium(III) sulfide is realized; and 2. all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Clark with evidence from or in view of MAES et al. (US 20170301542; below, “MAES” – previously cited 18 NOV 2021 IDS noted prior art reference). MPEP § 2143(A)-(G).
RE 18, Clark discloses the method according to claim 1 wherein, after the cyclical deposition process, the substrate (100) is subjected to an anneal in an ambient comprising hydrogen (see below for: and nitrogen), at a temperature from at least 300° C. to at most 600° C (e.g., [0038]).
Clark is silent regarding nitrogen.
MAES teaches using nitrogen in an anneal ambient (e.g., [0021]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use nitrogen in an anneal ambient because MAES shows this to be a functionally equivalent alternate expedient.
Claims 2, 3, 13-15, and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Clark with evidence from or in view of Raisanen et al. (US 20170306478; below, “Raisanen” – previously cited 18 NOV 2021 IDS noted prior art reference). MPEP § 2143(A)-(G).
RE 2, Clark is silent regarding the method according to claim 1 wherein the threshold voltage shifting layer (112, 122) comprises scandium boride, and Clark discloses wherein the precursor comprises a scandium precursor (e.g., [0026], [0040], [0065], claims 5, 9).
Raisanen, in FIGS. 1-3 and related text, e.g., Abstract, paragraphs [0001] to [0031], claims 1-18, teaches depositing metal borides (e.g., Abstract, [0007], [0024]).
Clark and Raisanen are analogous art from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Clark as taught by Raisanen because: 1. a process for forming metal boride films is realized (Raisanen Abstract, [0007]); and 2. all the claimed elements were known … and one … could have combined the elements …, and the combination would have yielded predictable results …. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
RE 3, modified Clark discloses the method according to claim 2 wherein the scandium precursor comprises one or more cyclopentadienyl ligands and one or more amidinate ligands (e.g., [0065]).
RE 13, Clark discloses using a wide variety of different rare earth precursors (e.g., [0065]). Clark is silent regarding the method according to claim 12 wherein the threshold voltage shifting layer (112, 122, e.g., [0026], [0040], [0065]) comprises cerium boride, and wherein the reactant comprises a boron reactant selected from the list consisting of hydroboranes; alkylboranes; haloboranes; and amines, ethers, alcohols, thiols, and dialkyl sulfides thereof.
Raisanen, in FIGS. 1-3 and related text, e.g., Abstract, paragraphs [0001] to [0031], claims 1-18, teaches depositing metal borides and a boron reactant selected from the list consisting of hydroboranes; alkylboranes; haloboranes; and amines, ethers, alcohols, thiols, and dialkyl sulfides thereof (e.g., Abstract, [0007], [0024]).
Clark and Raisanen are analogous art from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Clark as taught by Raisanen because: 1. a process for forming metal boride films is realized (Raisanen Abstract, [0007]); and 2. all the claimed elements were known … and one … could have combined the elements …, and the combination would have yielded predictable results …. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
RE 14, Clark is silent regarding the method according to claim 1 wherein the threshold voltage shifting layer (112, 122) comprises yttrium boride, and Clark discloses wherein the precursor comprises an yttrium precursor (e.g., [0026], [0040], [0065]).
Raisanen, in FIGS. 1-3 and related text, e.g., Abstract, paragraphs [0001] to [0031], claims 1-18, teaches depositing metal borides and a boron reactant (e.g., Abstract, [0007], [0024]).
Clark and Raisanen are analogous art from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. It would have been obvious … to modify Clark as taught by Raisanen because: 1. a process for forming metal boride films is realized (Raisanen Abstract, [0007]); and 2. all the claimed elements were known … and one … could have combined the elements …, and the combination would have yielded predictable results …. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
RE 15, modified Clark discloses the method according to claim 14 wherein the yttrium precursor comprises an alkyl-substituted cyclopentadienyl ligand and an amidinate ligand (e.g., [0026], [0040], [0065]).
RE 20, Clark, in FIGS. 2A to 2D and related text, e.g., Abstract, paragraphs [0001] to [0117], claims 1-20, discloses a method for depositing a threshold voltage shifting layer (108[Wingdings font/0xE0]112, 122), the method comprising the steps of:
- providing a substrate (100+110+104) within a reactor chamber (10), the substrate (100+110+104) comprising a surface, the surface comprising a high-k dielectric surface (e.g., [0039]);
- depositing a threshold voltage shifting layer (112, 122) onto the high-k dielectric surface by means of a cyclical deposition process ([0027]);
wherein the threshold voltage shifting layer (112, 122) comprises a material selected from (see ROMERO for: a lanthanide boride, a lanthanide sulfide, yttrium boride, yttrium sulfide, and scandium boride),([sic]);
wherein the cyclical deposition process comprises one or more cycles comprising:
providing (e.g., [0102]) a precursor (e.g., [0064] to [0069]) to the reaction chamber (10) in a precursor pulse; and
providing (e.g., [0102]) a reactant (e.g., [0057], [0084], [0110]) to the reaction chamber (10) in a reactant pulse;
thus forming a threshold voltage shifting layer (112, 122) on the substrate (100+110+104).
Clark is silent regarding a lanthanide boride, a lanthanide sulfide, yttrium boride, yttrium sulfide, and scandium boride (see [0064], [0065]).
Raisanen, in FIGS. 1-3 and related text, e.g., Abstract, paragraphs [0001] to [0031], claims 1-18, teaches depositing metal borides and a boron reactant (e.g., Abstract, [0007], [0024]).
Clark and Raisanen are analogous art from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. It would have been obvious … to modify Clark as taught by Raisanen because: 1. a more robust and forgiving layer forming process is realized including rare-earth-metal-containing boride films; and 2. all the claimed elements were known … and one … could have combined the elements …, and the combination would have yielded predictable results …. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
RE 21, Clark is silent regarding the method according to claim 1 wherein the threshold voltage shifting layer (112, 122) comprises a lathanide boride, and Clark discloses wherein the precursor comprises a lanthanide precursor (e.g., [0026], [0040], [0065]).
Raisanen, in FIGS. 1-3 and related text, e.g., Abstract, paragraphs [0001] to [0031], claims 1-18, teaches depositing metal borides and a boron reactant (e.g., Abstract, [0007], [0024]).
Clark and Raisanen are analogous art from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. It would have been obvious … to modify Clark as taught by Raisanen because: 1. a process for forming metal boride films is realized (Raisanen Abstract, [0007]); and 2. all the claimed elements were known … and one … could have combined the elements …, and the combination would have yielded predictable results …. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
RE 22, Clark is silent regarding the method according to claim 21 wherein the threshold voltage shifting layer (112, 122) is deposited by the cyclical deposition process at a temperature between 100 ° C and 400 ° C.
Raisanen, in FIGS. 1-3 and related text, e.g., Abstract, paragraphs [0001] to [0031], claims 1-18, teaches cyclical deposition process at a temperature between 100 ° C and 400 ° C. (e.g., [0021]).
Clark and Raisanen are analogous art from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. It would have been obvious … to modify Clark as taught by Raisanen because: 1. a process for forming metal boride films is realized (Raisanen Abstract, [0007]); and 2. all the claimed elements were known … and one … could have combined the elements …, and the combination would have yielded predictable results …. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Clark with evidence from and/or in view of Bojarczuk, JR. et al. (US 20060102968; below, “Bojarczuk”). MPEP § 2143(A)-(G).
RE 24, Clark is silent regarding the method according to claim 1, wherein the threshold voltage shifting layer (112, 122) is deposited directly onto the silicon oxide surface.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application wherein a threshold voltage shifting layer is deposited directly onto a silicon oxide surface because Bojarczuk, in FIGS. 2A to 3 and related text, e.g., Abstract, paragraphs [0001] to [0059], claims 1-40, shows this to be a functionally equivalent alternate expedient.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Clark with evidence from or in view of Raisanen with further evidence or in further view of PICKETT et al. (US 20170330748; below, “PICKETT” – previously cited). MPEP § 2143(A)-(G).
RE 8, modified Clark is silent regarding the method according to claim 2 wherein the threshold voltage shifting layer (112, 122) comprises scandium selenide, and Clark discloses wherein the reactant comprises a selenium reactant.
PICKETT, in Abstract, paragraphs [0001] to [0048], claims 1-18, teaches scandium selenide (e.g., [0032]) and a selenium reactant (claim 2)).
Modified Clark and PICKETT are analogous art from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. It would have been obvious … before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Clark with evidence from or in view of Raisanen as taught by PICKETT because: 1. a process for forming chalcogenide films with compositional uniformity over a large area is realized (PICKETT [0020]); and 2. all the claimed elements were known … and one … could have combined the elements …, and the combination would have yielded predictable results …. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Bojarczuk with evidence from and/or in view of Clark. MPEP § 2143(A)-(G).
RE 23, Bojarczuk, in FIGS. 2A to 3 and related text, e.g., Abstract, paragraphs [0001] to [0059], claims 1-40, discloses a method for depositing a threshold voltage shifting layer, the method comprising the steps of:
PNG
media_image2.png
790
1088
media_image2.png
Greyscale
providing a substrate (12+20, e.g., [0025]) within a reactor chamber (e.g., [0029]), the substrate (12+20) comprising a surface, the surface comprising a silicon oxide surface, the silicon oxide surface comprising SiO2 (e.g., [0030]);
depositing a threshold voltage shifting layer (22, e.g., [0002], [0034]) directly onto the silicon oxide surface by means of a cyclical deposition process (e.g., [0035]);
wherein the threshold voltage shifting layer (22) comprises an element selected from (see Clark for: a lanthanide, yttrium, scandium;
wherein the cyclical deposition process comprises one or more cycles comprising:
providing (e.g., [0102]) a precursor (e.g., [0068]) to the reaction chamber (10) in a precursor pulse; and
providing (e.g., [0102]) a reactant (e.g., [0057], [0084], [0110]) to the reaction chamber (10) in a reactant pulse);
thus forming a threshold voltage shifting layer (22) on the substrate (100).
Bojarczuk is silent regarding a lanthanide, yttrium, scandium; wherein the
cyclical deposition process comprises one or more cycles comprising: providing a precursor to the reaction chamber in a precursor pulse; and providing a reactant to the reaction chamber in a reactant pulse.
Clark, in FIGS. 2A to 2D and related text, e.g., Abstract, paragraphs [0001] to [0117], claims 1-20, teaches a lanthanide, yttrium, scandium (e.g., [0026], [0040]); wherein the cyclical deposition process comprises one or more cycles comprising: providing (e.g., [0102]) a precursor (e.g., [0068]) to the reaction chamber (10) in a precursor pulse; and providing (e.g., [0102]) a reactant (e.g., [0057], [0084], [0110]) to the reaction chamber (10) in a reactant pulse.
Bojarczuk and Clark are analogous art from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Bojarczuk as taught by Clark because: 1. work functions of gate stacks can be controlled and adjusted to obtain desired threshold voltages for negative/positive channel metal-oxide-semiconductor transistors (Clark [0039]); and 2. all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
Claims 1-4, 7-15, 17, 18, and 20-24 are rejected.
Response to Applicant’s Amendments and/or Arguments
Applicants’ rebuttal arguments filed 14 JAN 2026 (REM pages 6 to 9) have been fully considered, but are found to be unpersuasive in light of the arguments and positions outlined in the above claim rejections. Additionally, the new ground of rejection was necessary due to the applicants’ amendments. Applicants’ arguments vis-à-vis patentability have been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Walter Swanson whose telephone number is (571) 270-3322. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday, 8:30 to 17:30 EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joshua Benitez, can be reached on (571)270-1435. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WALTER H SWANSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815