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 (IDS) submitted on 12/31/2021 is being considered by the examiner.
Status of Claims
This office action is in response to "Claims filed on 4/27/2026". Applicant's amendments of claims 12-15, 17-18; cancellation of claim 16 with the same reply have been entered by the Examiner. Upon entry of the amendments, claims 1-15, 17-18 are pending wherein claims 1-11 are withdrawn, claim 12 is independent.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: With regards to claim 12, the limitation “a hardmask each having a net tensile stress” could be amended to “a hardmask having a net tensile stress” to reflect the claim scope accurately. 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.
Note applicable to all claims being rejected in this Office action: Examiner notes that the limitations "overlap", "layer", "portion" “aligned” are being interpreted broadly in accordance with MPEP. Per MPEP 2111 and 2111.01, the claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation and the words of the claims are given their plain meaning consistent with the specification without importing claim limitations from the specification. The claim presently disclose a structural limitation (i.e. overlap, layer, portion, contact) that is taught by prior art of record, therefore, the limitation is considered met by the prior art of record. Additionally, Merriam Webster dictionary defines the above limitations as “to occupy the same area in part”, “one thickness lying over or under another”, “an often limited part of a whole” “to be in correct relative position” respectively. Further note the limitation “contact” is being interpreted to include "direct contact" (no intermediate materials, elements or space disposed there between) and "indirect contact" (intermediate materials, elements or space disposed there between).
Claim(s) 12-13, 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dutta et al (US 2021/0375986 A1 hereinafter Dutta).
Regarding Claim 12, Dutta discloses in Fig 1: A structure in an integrated circuit device comprising:
a hardmask (140) each having a net tensile stress for a memory device in the integrated circuit device;
a memory pillar (132) under and in direct contact with the hardmask;
a bottom electrode (130) located under and in direct contact with the memory pillar;
a bottom electrode contact (126) located beneath and in direct contact with the bottom electrode; and
an encapsulation layer (110) located around and in direct contact with the hardmask, the memory pillar, and the bottom electrode [0029-0032]. Examiner notes that the materials for hardmask disclosed by the Applicant in [0032] are the same as that disclosed by Dutta in [0032] and hence the stress behavior of the materials is the same as that required by the claim.
Regarding Claim 13, Dutta discloses in Fig 1: The structure as recited in claim 12, wherein the metallic hardmask has a single layer of tensilely stressed metallic material [0032].
Regarding Claim 15, Dutta discloses in Fig 1: The structure as recited in claim 12, further comprising: a substrate layer comprising a dielectric (102) and a set of metal interconnects (120) which connects respective memory devices to other devices in the integrated circuit device; where each of the bottom electrode contact (126) is aligned to and in electrical contact with a respective metal interconnect (120) [0031]; and a planarized capping layer (104) is disposed around the bottom electrode contact [0031-0032].
Regarding Claim 17, Dutta discloses in Fig 1: The structure as recited in claim 13, wherein the single layer of tensilely stressed material is TiN [0032].
Regarding Claim 18, Dutta discloses in Fig 1: The structure as recited in claim 14, wherein the plurality of metal layers comprises a tensilely stressed layer of TiN and a compressively stressed layer of TaN [0032]. Examiner notes that the materials for hardmask (plurality of metal layers) disclosed by the Applicant in [0032] are the same as that disclosed by Dutta in [0032] and hence the stress behavior of the materials is the same as that required by the claim.
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) 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dutta in view of Rizzollo (US 2020/0126791 A1 hereinafter Rizzollo).
Regarding Claim 14, Dutta discloses: The structure as recited in claim 12and that the hardmask can include Nb, NbN, W, WN, Ta, TaN, Ti, TiN, Ru, Mo, Cr, V, Pd, Pt, Rh, Sc, Al, and/or other high melting point metals or conductive metal nitrides [0032].
Dutta does not disclose: wherein the hardmask has a plurality of metal layers of alternating a tensilely stressed material and a compressively stressed material.
However, Rizzollo in a similar device teaches in Fig 1: wherein the hardmask has a plurality of metal layers of alternating a tensilely stressed material and a compressively stressed material [0037-0039].
References Dutta and Rizzollo are analogous art because they both are directed to memory devices and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify device of Dutta with the specified features of Rizzollo because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing of the invention to combine teachings of Dutta and Rizzollo so that the hardmask has a plurality of metal layers of alternating a tensilely stressed material and a compressively stressed material as taught by Rizzollo in Dutta’s device since, this provides a reduction of high film stress and wafer bow caused by thick conductive hardmasks [0019].
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NISHATH YASMEEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7564. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9AM-6PM.
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.
/NISHATH YASMEEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2811
Prosecution Insights