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 .
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1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/02/26 has been entered.
Claim 1 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as
being drawn to a nonelected group I, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 04/20/23. Applicant's election
without traverse of group Il in the reply filed on 07/23/24 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. There is no support in disclosure indicating forming a first oxide by providing a gas comprising an indium precursor, and aluminum precursor and a first oxidant to a first chamber.
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.
Claims 9, 11, 14-15, 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kyung Won et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2015/0221507, here after Won), further in view of Oreste Madia et al (U.S. Patent Application: 2021/0118672, here after Madia).
Claims 9, 11 are rejected. Won teaches a method of forming a layer comprising
indium gallium zinc oxide (IGZO) [430 in fig. 6], by providing a process module
comprising first, second, third and fourth reaction chamber [fig. 2] and performing a pre-
deposition treatment (passivating pretreatment) on the substrate [fig. 5], in any chamber (for example in fourth chamber) wherein the pre-deposition treatment consisting of exposing the substrate to reducing gas(hydrogen) with plasma [0070] which in fact generates excited species of the reducing agent gas(hydrogen), and removes carbon contamination (if any) from the surface. Won teaches depositing IGZO layers, but does not teach the details of deposition process. Madia teaches a method of forming a layer comprising indium gallium zinc oxide, wherein the layer comprising InO, GaO, and ZnO [abstract], the method comprising the steps of: forming a layer comprising InO on a surface of a substrate; forming a layer comprising GaO on a surface of a substrate; and forming a layer comprising ZnO on a surface of a substrate [0048]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of Won when the IGZO is deposited by method of Madia, because it is suitable method of depositing IGZO for transistors. Madia as well as Won teaches using a cluster tool for deposition process [0042], which in fact each of the reaction space(chamber) is dedicated to one type of process wherein the temperature of the reaction space in each module can be kept constant [0045]. Madia teaches processing system comprising processing chambers [0041, fig. 2], where a processing chamber comprising a susceptor (338) [0044, 0046, fig. 3]. Madia also teaches a temperature of susceptor is controlled independently [0045] which in fact control the growth rate as well. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of Won and Media when each of the chambers in Media is a PECVD as chamber 300, because it is suitable to deposit each layer in each chamber and reduce contamination. Therefore InO, GaO, and ZnO each can be deposited in a separate chamber, where the first chamber is for depositing InO, the second chamber is for depositing GaO and the third chamber is for depositing ZnO [0048]. Won teaches forming an additional metal oxide (650, top layer, or a dielectric layer 107), wherein the additional metal oxide comprises aluminum [0095]. It is to skill of an ordinary skill in art to deposit aluminum oxide in a separate fourth reaction chamber in absence of criticality. Won also teaches after forming IGZO, performing a post deposition treatment of the layer (repeating ozone treatment for making aluminum oxide top coat layer to desire thickness) [0095], where the indium gallium zinc oxide exposed to ozone. Alternatively Won teaches treating (post-treatment, step 440) on IGZO oxide layer [0064] similarly to pre-treatment [0083] by exposing the layer to oxygen containing gas [0069]. They do not teach the gallium precursor is Ga (CpMe5). Mizutani teaches using pentamethylcyclopentadieny. gallium precursor for making gallium oxide film [abstract]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of Won and Media when gallium precursor for depositing gallium oxide layer is pentamethylcyclopentadieny. gallium, because it is suitable precursor for depositing gallium oxide film from vapor phase.
Claim 14 is rejected. Won teaches treating (post-treatment, step 440) on IGZO
oxide layer [0064] similarly to pre-treatment [0083], therefor it is obvious to do
treating(post-treatment) in the same chamber of pre-treatment of the fourth chamber as
well.
Claim 15 is rejected as Won teaches reducing gas consists of ammonia [claim 8],
and wherein the pre-deposition treatment comprises forming excited or reactive
species(radicals) of the reducing gas [claim 8], wherein the pre- deposition treatment
and the post-deposition treatment are performed in the fourth chamber (see claim 14
rejection above).
Claim 28 is rejected. Won teaches a method of forming a layer comprising indium gallium zinc oxide (IGZO) [430 in fig. 6], by providing a process module comprising first, second, third and fourth reaction chamber [fig. 2] and performing a treating (post-deposition treatment) (440, and similar to 420) on the substrate [fig. 4, 0083], in any chamber (for example in fourth chamber) wherein the post-deposition treatment comprising exposing the substrate to oxygen containing gas and nitrogen containing gas[0069] to tune the properties of the layer[0013]. Won teaches depositing IGZO layers, but does not teach the details of deposition process. Madia teaches a method of forming a layer comprising indium gallium zinc oxide, wherein the layer comprising InO, GaO, and ZnO [abstract], the method comprising the steps of: forming an indium oxide layer on a substrate by providing an indium precursor and a first oxidant to a first reaction chamber; forming a gallium oxide layer on the substrate by providing a gallium precursor and a second oxidant to a second reaction chamber; forming a zinc oxide layer on the substrate by providing a zinc precursor and a third oxidant to a third reaction chamber wherein the layer comprising indium gallium zinc oxide comprises the indium oxide layer, the gallium oxide layer, and the zinc oxide layer[0048]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of Won when the IGZO is deposited by method of Madia, because it is suitable method of depositing IGZO for transistors.
Claim 29 is rejected as Won teaches the nitrogen-containing gases comprise one or more of ammonia [0069].
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kyung Won et al (U. S. Patent
Application: 2015/0221507, here after Won), Oreste Madia et al (U.S. Patent
Application: 2021/0118672, here after Madia), further in view of Eric A Burgett (U. S. Patent Application: 2017/0253992, here after Burgett).
Claims 12-13 are rejected. Won teaches preheat treatment and expose the substrate to oxygen containing gas [0069] and then pretreat the substrate and expose the substrate to reducing agent hydrogen [0070], but does not teach pre-treatment(reducing) gas consist of hydrazine. Burgett teaches prior to depositing, cleaning surface of substrate with hydrogen or hydrazine to remove extra oxygen [0060]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of Won and Media when cleaning is done with hydrazine, because it is suitable way to clean substrate and remove extra oxygen prior to depositing another layer.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over rejected
under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kyung Won et al (U. S. Patent
Application: 2015/0221507, here after Won), Oreste Madia et al (U.S. Patent
Application: 2021/0118672, here after Madia), further in view of Chia-Fu Hsu (U. S.
Patent Application: 2016/0268311, here after Hsu), and T. Yokoi et al (Japanese Patent: 2016219851, here after Yokoi).
Claim 16 is rejected. Won does not teach the IGZO layer comprising aluminum. Hsu teaches making a TFT where dielectric layer is IGZO or IAGZO [0023]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of Won and Media and dielectric layer comprising IAGZO, because it is suitable dielectric layer for making TFT devices. Won teaches depositing layer precursors of indium, gallium, zinc and oxidation. Madia teaches depositing indium precursor layer oxidizing, depositing gallium precursor layer, oxidizing and depositing zinc precursor layer and oxidizing. Hsu also teaches depositing layer comprising aluminum and indium precursor, but does not teach deposition with ALD. Yokoi teaches deposition of IAGZO with ALD [page 7 lines 6-7, page 6 lines 11-12]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of Won and Media and dielectric layer comprising IAGZO where the IAGZO layer is deposited by ALD, because it is a suitable method for depositing oxide semiconductors. ALD process comprises flowing aluminum precursor gas and indium precursor gas following by oxidation, and can be done in first chamber in absence of criticality.
Claims 30-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kyung Won et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2015/0221507, here after Won), Oreste Madia et al (U.S. Patent Application: 2021/0118672, here after Madia), further in view of Mark Saly (U. S. Patent Application:2016/0099144, here after Saly).
Claim 30 is rejected. Won teaches the oxygen-containing gases comprise
water, and NO2 [0069], but does not teach it is hydrogen peroxide. Saly teaches treating oxide layer with peroxide to remove nitrogen content [0006]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of Won and Media and dielectric layer comprising IAGZO as Media teaches where the oxide film is post-treat with oxidizing such as peroxide to reduce nitrogen content.
Claim 31 is rejected. The examiner takes official notice that the nitrous oxide gas and oxygen radicals react to form NO and O2 therefore the amount of nitrogen-
containing gas (NO2) provided varied during the post-deposition treatment.
Claim 32 is rejected as Won teaches the post-deposition treatment (similar to
pre-deposition) comprises a direct or remote plasma process [0068, 0069-0071, 0083, 0053].
Claims 33-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kyung Won et al (U. S. Patent
Application: 2015/0221507, here after Won), Oreste Madia et al (U.S. Patent
Application: 2021/0118672, here after Madia), Mark Saly (U. S. Patent Application:2016/0099144, here after Saly), further in view of Xiaodi Liu et al (EP
2787527, here after Liu).
Claims 33-34 are rejected. Won teaches the (post)treatment is plasma treatment, but does not teach plasma is direct plasma. Liu teaches plasma treatment (post- treatment) of IGZO after deposition to increase carrier mobility, wherein the plasma is low-frequency (RF) [0039, 0040, 0047]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of Wo and Madia, where the IGZO film is plasma treated with low- frequency direct plasma (RF, post-treatment) because it increases carrier mobility.
Claim 35 is rejected. Won teaches a method of forming a layer comprising indium gallium zinc oxide (IGZO) [430 in fig. 6], by providing a process module comprising first, second, third and fourth reaction chamber [fig. 2] and performing a treating (post-deposition treatment or pre-treatment deposition) (440, and similar to 420) on the substrate [fig. 4, 0083], in any chamber (for example in fourth chamber). Won teaches performing a pre-deposition treatment on the substrate before forming the indium oxide layer, the gallium oxide layer, and the zinc oxide layer, wherein the pre-deposition treatment comprises exposing the substrate to a reducing gas (hydrogen or ammonia) [0069] which in fact the pre-deposition treatment comprises removing carbon
contaminants from the surface.
Claims 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kyung Won et al (U. S. Patent
Application: 2015/0221507, here after Won), further in view of Oreste Madia et al (U.S. Patent Application: 2021/0118672, here after Madia), Chia-Fu Hsu (U. S.
Patent Application: 2016/0268311, here after Hsu), and T. Yokoi et al (Japanese Patent: 2016219851, here after Yokoi), and Christophe Lachaud et al (FR 2998582, here
after Lachaud).
Claims 19 and 21 are rejected for the same reason claims 28 and 16 are rejected above. Each of Won chambers can be assigned for deposition of an oxide film. Won also teaches depositing additional aluminum oxide (protective layer 107) [0033-0034] on IGZO film [fig. 1], which in fact deposited by metal precursor(cvd) and can be done in fourth chamber [0034]. Won also teaches post plasma treatment (similar to pre-
treatment) consists essentially of forming a plasma, wherein a gas used to form the
plasma consists of a gas selected from the group consisting of nitrogen, hydrogen,
ammonia, wherein at least two of the first oxidant, the second oxidant, and the third
oxidant differ [0069, 0070, 0083, 0097]. Madia teaches forming zinc oxide film by diethyl
zinc and water (as an oxidant) [0096-0097], but does not teach using tert-butanol during
growth. Lachaud teaches depositing zinc oxide film from diethyl zinc and water, and
also teaches alcohol such as tert-butanol as oxidant [abstract]. It is prima facie obvious
to combine two compositions each of which is taught by the prior art to be useful for the
same purpose, in order to form this composition to be used for the very same
purpose...[T]he idea of combining them flows logically from there having been
individually taught in the prior art. In re Kerkhoven, 626 F.2d 846, 850, 205 USPQ 1069
1072. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time
of the invention was made to have a method of Won and Madia when oxidant reactant
is water and alcohol (tert- butanol), because the combination of alcohol and water are
also suitable as oxidant for diethyl zinc and form zinc oxide film from vapor phase. using
paraformaldehyde during the growth as co-reactant, because it suitable to have co-
reactant by deposition of indium oxide on dielectric substrate. Tetr-butyl is in fact growth
inhibitor.
Claim 20 is rejected as Won teaches formation of an ITO layer [0033]. It is to the skill of an ordinary person in art to deposit ITO layer by CVD or ALD.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over rejected
under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kyung Won et al (U. S. Patent
Application: 2015/0221507, here after Won), Oreste Madia et al (U.S. Patent
Application: 2021/0118672, here after Madia), further in view of Chia-Fu Hsu (U. S.
Patent Application: 2016/0268311, here after Hsu), T. Yokoi et al (Japanese Patent: 2016219851, here after Yokoi), Christophe Lachaud et al (FR 2998582, here after
Lachaud), further in view of W. Chen et al (Taiwanese Patent: 201421696, here after
Chen).
Claim 22 is rejected. Won teaches the additional metal oxide layer comprising
aluminum oxide (protective layer) [0031], but does not teach the protective layer is
titanium oxide. Chen teaches a method of making TFT, when the protective layer is
aluminum oxide or titanium oxide [page 4 paragraph 4, Fig. 1B]. Therefore, it would
have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was
made to have a method of Won, Madia, Hsu, Yokio and Lachaud when the protective
layer is titanium oxide, because it is suitable protective layer for TFT. It is to the skill of
an ordinary person in art to deposit titanium oxide layer by CVD or ALD.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/03/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues Won does not teach a pre-treatment consist of exposing the substrate to reducing agent. The examiner disagrees, fig. 5 shows pretreatment and paragraph 0070 teaches reducing gas (hydrogen and ammonia). Paragraph 0069 in fact teaches a preheating process which is not including pre-treating process.
The applicant argument regarding claim 14 is not persuasive, Won teaches post deposition treatment is similar to pretreatment process, therefore a chamber for example chamber 4 is consider for pretreatment and post treatment process with oxidant and reducing gases, and there is no reason to consider they are done in separate chambers to increase the cost. Same argument is valid for claim 28 rejections above, in fact Won teaches post deposition treatment (similar to predisposition treatment) comprising treating the substrate with nitrogen containing and oxygen containing gases [0069].
The applicant argument regarding claim 31 rejection is not persuasive, Won teaches mixture of oxidizing gases during the process and the nitrous oxide gas and oxygen radicals react to form NO and O2 therefore the amount of nitrogen-containing gas (NO2) provided varied during the post-deposition treatment.
Regarding the applicant argument for claim 32, Won teaches post treatment (similar to pretreatment providing oxygen and nitrogen containing gases) [0069] with plasma(direct) [0069, 0071], and also teaches also using remote plasma for dissociation of oxygen gas molecules [0053] which in fact can be used for post treatment.
The applicant argument regrading claims 12-13 is not persuasive, as the applicant amended the claims, the examiner use Burgett reference for teaching hydrazine (see claim rejection above).
The applicant argument regrading claim 16 rejection is not persuasive as Xia is not a part of rejection and rejection is based on Yokio et al (see claim rejection above).
Similarly claim 19 is also based on Yokio in combination of previous references where Yokio teaches atomic layer deposition of IAGZO and therefore indium precursor gas and aluminum precursor gas flow on substrate following by exposing the substrate to oxidant precursor, where it can be in the first chamber and in absence of criticality.
Same above statement is valid for the rest of the applicant arguments.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TABASSOM TADAYYON ESLAMI whose telephone number is (571)270-1885. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at 5712725166. 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.
/TABASSOM TADAYYON ESLAMI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Prosecution Insights