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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-25 and 28 are cancelled. Claims 26, 27, and 29-35 are pending and rejected. Claims 26, 29, and 35 are amended.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 26, 27, and 29-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Na, WO 2021/046058 A1 in view of Arteaga, US 2019/0368039 A1, Yu, US 2019/0390340 A1, Parikh, US 2019/0352776 A1, Ma, US 2013/0196507 A1, and Gatineau, US 2016/0002786 A1.
Regarding claims 26, 27, and 29, Na teaches a deposition method (abstract) comprising:
depositing a molybdenum film directly on a substrate surface by exposing the substrate surface to a molybdenum-containing precursor and a plasma at a temperature of less than or equal to 400°C in a processing chamber (selectively depositing the Mo films on bottom metal-containing surfaces of a feature including dielectric sidewalls, abstract, where the molybdenum film is formed by exposing the feature on the substrate to alternate pulses of a molybdenum-containing precursor and a reducing agent at a first temperature, where the temperature is no more than 400°C, 0005-0006, where the reducing agent is plasma hydrogen, 0032, and where the process is done in a chamber of ALD process station of a multi-station processing tool, 0006, 0045, Fig.8, and Fig. 9),
the processing chamber having a housing with walls, a bottom, and a top plate, the walls, the bottom, and the top plate defining an interior volume (where the chamber is depicted as having a housing with walls, a bottom, and a top plate defining an interior volume, Fig. 8),
wherein the substrate surface comprises a feature formed therein, the feature has at least one surface defining a via, the via comprises a bottom surface including a metal material and two sidewalls including a low-K dielectric material, and the molybdenum film fills the via (where the substrate includes a feature that may be a via, abstract, 0026, where the feature has dielectric sidewalls and bottom metal-containing surfaces and the molybdenum fills the via, abstract, Fig. 3, and Fig. 4, where the sidewall surfaces are formed from silicon-based oxides, silicon nitrides, etc., 0023-0024, such that they are understood to be low-k dielectric materials).
They do not teach that the processing chamber comprises a multi-wafer processing chamber.
Na further teaches that the molybdenum-containing precursor includes molybdenum tetrachloride oxide (MoOCl4) or molybdenum dichloride dioxide (MoO2Cl2) (0032), as require for claim 27.
Arteaga teaches Group 6 transition metal-containing thin film forming precursors used to deposit Group 6 transition metal-containing films on one or more substrate via vapor deposition processes (abstract). They teach various precursors including MoO2Cl2 (0011) and MoOCl4 (0032). They teach depositing the films by introducing at least one Group 6 transition metal-containing thin film forming composition into a reactor having at least one substrate disposed therein to deposit at least part of the precursor on the substrate (0175). They teach introducing at least one reactant into the reactor, where the reactant is plasma-treated or remote plasma-treated and is selected from the group consisting of H2, SiH4, NH3, and mixtures thereof (0176-0180). They teach that these reactants are reducing gases, where N2 may also be used as a reactant when treated with plasma (0345-0346). They teach that when using plasma, the deposition temperature may range from approximately 150-400°C, whereas when using a thermal process, the temperature may range from approximately 200-500°C (0324-0325). Therefore, Arteaga teaches depositing a molybdenum-containing film by reacting the same molybdenum precursors as Na at a temperature of approximately 150-400°C, where the reducing agent is plasma treated and selected from a group including hydrogen, silane, and nitrogen. Arteaga further teaches that the reactor for depositing the film can be configured for spatial atomic layer deposition (0194 and 0314). They teach that the Group 6 transition metal-containing film forming compositions and reactants may be introduced into the reactor either simultaneously (CVD), sequentially (ALD), or different combinations thereof (0351). They teach that the vaporized compositions and reactants may be simultaneously sprayed from a shower head under which a susceptor holding several wafers is spun (spatial ALD) (0352).
Yu teaches depositing a film by spatial ALD (abstract and 0033). They teach that in spatial ALD, a first reactive gas and second reactive gas are delivered simultaneously to the reaction zone but are separated by an inert as curtain and/or vacuum curtain (0033). They teach that the substrate is moved relative to the gas delivery apparatus so that any given portion on the substrate is exposed to the first reactive gas and the second reactive gas (0033). They teach that the processes use a reaction chamber with multiple gas ports that can be used for introduction of different chemicals or plasma gases, where the ports are separated by inert purging gases and/or vacuum pumping holes to create a gas curtain that minimizes or eliminates mixing of gases from different gas ports to avoid unwanted gas phase reactions (0035). They teach a batch processing chamber configured to process in the range of about 4 to about 12 wafers at the same time (0046 and Fig. 1-4). They teach that the chamber includes a gas distribution assembly 220 which can be a showerhead (0047-0048 and Fig. 2-4). They teach that spatial gas distribution assemblies have a plurality of substantially parallel gas channels, where in a binary reaction, the channels can include at least one first reactive gas A channel, at least one second reactive gas B channel, at least one purge gas P channel and/or at least one vacuum V channel (0048). They teach that the gases flowing from the respective channels are directed toward the top surface of the wafer and a substrate moving from one end of the gas distribution assembly to the other end will be exposed to each of the process gases in turn, forming a layer on the substrate surface (0048). They teach that processing chambers having multiple gas injectors can be used to process multiple wafers simultaneously so that the wafers experience the same process flow (0055 and Fig. 4). They provide an example of a chamber processing 4 substrates having two gas distribution assemblies 220, where the gas distribution assemblies form a film on the substrates (0055 and Fig. 4). They teach that a first reactive gas port 225 provides a flow of a metal precursor and other ports provide a flow of a reactant, or flow of a plasma (0073 and Fig. 5-6). They teach that in some embodiments, a plasma pulse is introduced into the ALD deposition cycle (0187). Therefore, Yu teaches a spatial ALD process in which a chamber includes multiple wafers and has two gas distribution assemblies so as to provide multiple stations in the chamber for forming films on the substrate, where different channels are used for providing the metal precursor and a plasma.
From the teachings of Arteaga and Yu, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have deposited the molybdenum film by spatial ALD using an apparatus having a chamber for processing multiple wafers using two gas distribution assemblies for forming films on the substrate, where different channels are used for providing the metal precursor and a plasma because Arteaga teaches that spatial ALD is suitable for forming a molybdenum-containing film by reaction of a molybdenum precursor such as those used by Na with a reducing plasma such as that used by Na using temperatures overlapping the range of Na and Yu provides an apparatus for spatial ALD capable of depositing films on multiple wafers such that it will be expected to form the film as desired while increasing the throughput of the process. Therefore, the molybdenum will be deposited in a processing chamber comprising a multi-wafer or substrate processing chamber including a plurality of processing stations (i.e., film-forming stations using gas distribution assemblies 220). Further, since they teach providing the gases using a gas distribution assembly where the precursor and the reactive gas (which can include plasma) are provided in different channels, the showerhead or gas distribution assembly is considered to be a dual channel showerhead having a first channel for the metal precursor and a second channel for the plasma, where they are flowed through the channels to deposit the film on the substrate.
They do not teach that the dual channel showerhead is directly on the top plate.
Parikh teaches a method of processing one or more wafers using a plurality of process stations to deposit, anneal, treat, and optionally etch a film (abstract). They teach that the process provides spatial separation for ALD with incompatible gases to allow for higher throughput and tool resource utilization than a traditional time-domain process (0047). They teach a processing chamber having walls, a bottom, and a top, that define an interior volume (0072, Fig. 6-7). They teach that chamber includes a plurality of process stations 210, where each process station comprises a gas injector 212 having a front face 214 (0073, Fig. 6-7). They teach that the type of gas injector varies and can be configured to operate as an atomic layer deposition apparatus (0074). They depict the gas injectors as being in a top plate of the chamber (Fig. 6). Further, the chamber of Parikh is depicted as having a housing with walls, a bottom, and a top plate, the walls, the bottom, and the top plated defining an interior volume (Fig. 6-7).
From the teachings of Parikh, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the gas distribution assemblies or dual channel showerhead of the spatial ALD process in a top plate of a chamber having a housing with walls, a bottom, and a top plate, the walls, the bottom, and the top plated defining an interior volume because Parikh depicts such a configuration for spatial ALD such that it will be expected to support the showerhead/assemblies for the deposition process. Therefore, the dual channel showerhead is considered to be directly on the top plate as depicted in Fig. 6-7 of Parikh and Fig. 1-2 of the instant specification.
They do not teach that the molybdenum-containing precursor source and the plasma source are on the top plate.
Na depicts the precursor and reducing agent sources as being above the shower head (0038, 0046, Fig. 6A, and Fig. 8).
Ma teaches depositing metal layers by ALD by sequentially exposing a substrate to a metal precursor followed by a plasma (abstract). They teach that the plasma may be hydrogen, ammonia, etc. (0007). They teach that the substrate is placed in a processing chamber comprising a gas distribution plate that comprises at least one first reactive gas injector and at least one second reactive gas injector, where the first provide the metal precursor and the second provides plasma to the deposition region (0013). They teach that a portion of the substrate is passed across the gas distribution plate in a first direction so that the portion of the substrate is sequentially exposed to the metal precursor followed by the plasma (0013). They teach that the system may be configured to process a plurality of substrates (0057 and Fig. 2). They teach that the processing chamber includes a showerhead for delivering gases, where the gas distribution plate includes a faceplate 706 that has two sets of openings (0025 and Fig. 1-2). They teach that the faceplate may be a dual channel faceplate that keeps the precursor and plasma gas or species independent until they leave the gas distribution plate for the deposition region (0026 and Fig. 1-2). They teach that the system includes a load lock chamber (0044 and Fig. 2), where when multiple substrates are processed a second load lock chamber can be used to retrieve the substrates (0057). They teach that the process is directed to spatial ALD (0044). They depict the precursor sources from coming above the gas distribution plate (0047 and Fig. 2).
From the teachings of Na and Ma, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provide the molybdenum-containing precursor source and the plasma source on the dual channel showerhead on the top plate because Na depicts providing the precursors from the top and Ma depicts providing the precursor to a dual-channel faceplate from the top, where Ma teaches that such a faceplate is desirable in a spatial ALD process to keep the precursor and plasma separate until entering the deposition zone such that it will be expected to provide the gases to the showerhead as desired.
As to the plasma gases, Na suggests using hydrogen plasma as the reducing agent (0006).
Arteaga teaches using a reactant that is plasma treated and can be selected from hydrogen, ammonia, silane, and mixtures thereof, where these reactants are reducing gases (0177, 0180, 0345). They teach that N2 may also be used as a reducing gas when treated with plasma (0346).
They do not teach using N2 plasma as the reducing gas when mixed with other gases.
Gatineau teaches depositing molybdenum-containing films (abstract). They teach forming the films by PEALD (0112). They teach that the film is Mo (0127). They teach reacting the molybdenum precursor with a reducing agent selected from the group consisting of N2, H2, NH3, SiH4, radical species thereof, and combinations thereof (0119-0120). They teach that the reaction gas may be treated by plasma in order to decompose the reaction gas into its radical form (0384).
From the teachings of Na, Arteaga, and Gatineau, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used a combination of reducing agents or co-reactants in the plasma such as N2, H2, SiH4, and NH3 because Na teaches that hydrogen plasma can be used, Arteaga teaches that mixture of hydrogen, silane, and ammonia plasma can be used, where nitrogen plasma can also be used, and Gatineau teaches using a mixture of silane, nitrogen, hydrogen, and ammonia plasma as reducing agents to deposit a molybdenum film by a PEALD process, such that a plasma mixture of nitrogen, hydrogen, silane, and ammonia is expected to provide a suitable reducing agent mixture for reacting with the molybdenum precursor to form the molybdenum film.
Regarding claim 30, Na in view of Arteaga, Yu, Parikh, Ma, and Gatineau suggest the process of claim 26. Na teaches depositing the film by ALD (0005), where the process is suggested to be a spatial ALD process.
Regarding claim 31, Na in view of Arteaga, Yu, Parikh, Ma, and Gatineau suggest the process of claim 26. Na teaches depositing the films at a temperature between about 350°C and 450°C or 400°C (0033 and 0044), so as to overlap the claimed range.
Na teaches that the chamber pressures may range from 1 torr to 100 torr (0037), so as to be within the claimed range.
According to MPEP 2131.03, “[W]hen, as by a recitation of ranges or otherwise, a claim covers several compositions, the claim is ‘anticipated’ if one of them is in the prior art.” Titanium Metals Corp.v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citing In re Petering, 301 F.2d 676, 682, 133 USPQ 275, 280 (CCPA 1962)) (emphasis in original). According to MPEP 2144.05 II A, “Generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 32, Na in view of Arteaga, Yu, Parikh, Ma, and Gatineau suggest the process of claim 26. Na further teaches that the dielectric material comprises silicon-based oxides, carbon doped silicon-based oxides, nitrides such as SixNy, etc. (0023-0024), such that it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used SiO2, Si3N4, or SiOC, as the low-k dielectric because it will provide a carbon-doped silicon oxide, and because SiO2 and Si3N4 are stoichiometric forms of silicon oxide and silicon nitride such that it will be expected to provide suitable dielectrics.
Claims 33 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Na in view of Arteaga, Yu, Parikh, Ma, and Gatineau as applied to claim 26 above, and further in view of Murakami, JP 2003313666 A.
The following citations for Murakami, JP 2003313666 A are in reference to the machine translation provided by Espacenet and the figures in the original document.
Regarding claims 33 and 34, Na in view of Arteaga, Yu, Parikh, Ma, and Gatineau suggest the process of claim 26.
They do not teach that at least portion of the processing chamber is coated with nickel prior to depositing molybdenum film. As noted above, Na teaches using halide precursors such as molybdenum dioxide dichloride, and molybdenum oxytetrachloride.
Murakami teaches a gas treatment device which can reduce metal contamination of a substrate to be treated (abstract). They teach that the substrate is treated with a halogen-containing treatment gas and at least either the chamber or the showerhead that contacts the treatment gas is made of a metal material which forms a low-vapor pressure metal compound substantially comprising metals including nickel (abstract). They teach that the chamber and at least one of the chamber internal components may be entirely made of the metal or may have a plating layer substantially made of the metal, where by forming such a plating layer, the desired object can be achieved simply and inexpensively (0013). They teach that the chamber has an inner wall surface formed of a base material made of aluminum or an aluminum alloy and a coating layer 31c formed of substantially any one of Ni, Co., etc. (0022 and Fig. 3). They teach that the metals react with the halogen-containing process gas to form low vapor pressure metal compounds (0022). They teach that a shower head is also coated with the metal (0024).
Murakami teaches applying the nickel coating to a showerhead in the chamber as well as the inner wall of the chamber (0022 and 0024). They teach that the inside of an exhaust chamber is also covered with a layer 66a made of the same material as the inner wall layer 31c (0027 and Fig. 3).
From the teachings of Murakami, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the process of Na in view of Arteaga, Yu, Parikh, Ma, and Gatineau to have coated at least a portion of the dual channel showerhead and the entire processing chamber with nickel prior to coating because Na teaches using halogen gases in depositing the molybdenum film and Murakami teaches that a nickel coating prevents metal contamination when treating a substrate with a halogen gas, where the walls of the chamber and the showerhead are coated with nickel such that by coating the entire inner surface of the processing chamber and at least a portion of the showerhead with nickel it will be expected to prevent contamination of the substrate during deposition.
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thombare, WO 2022/150270 A1 in view of Schloss, WO 2021/076636 A1, Arteaga, US 2019/0368039 A1, Yu, US 2019/0390340 A1, Parikh, US 2019/0352776 A1, Ma, US 2013/0196507 A1, and Gatineau, US 2016/0002786 A1.
It is noted that the second inventor is used for WO 2022/150270 A1 to differentiate between Na references.
Regarding claim 35, Thombare teaches deposition processes including deposition of a thin, protective Mo layer using a molybdenum chloride precursor followed by Mo deposition to fill the feature using a molybdenum oxyhalide precursor (abstract). They teach that the substrate includes a feature formed in a dielectric material 413 to connect to an underlying titanium silicide TiSix, 407 (0105 and Fig. 4A). They teach that the feature may be a trench or via that is formed in a dielectric layer, where dielectric materials include oxides, such as silicon oxide, silicon nitride, nitrogen-doped silicon carbide, and oxygen-doped silicon carbide, and low k dielectrics such as carbon-doped silicon oxide (0071), so as to provide low k materials. They teach that the dielectric material 413 is mostly oxide and forms the sidewall surfaces 411 (0105 and Fig. 4A). They teach depositing an initial Mo layer by an ALD process using an MoClx precursor directly on the dielectric material and on the underlying TiSix 407 (0107 and Fig. 4C). They teach that the initial Mo layer 421 may be less than 5 nm thick, where the layer conformally covers the dielectric material on the feature sidewalls and the TiSix feature bottom (0107 and Fig. 4C). They teach filling the feature with Mo deposited by a PEALD or PECVD process using a Mo oxyhalide precursor (0108 and Fig. 4D). They teach that the underlying metal layer can be a metal or metal silicide (0071), indicating that a metal can be used in place of TiSi.
They teach depositing the initial Mo layer using the MoClx precursor and a reducing agent such as hydrogen, ammonia, silane, etc. (0078). They teach that the substrate may be heated between 300°C and 500°C, e.g., between 350°C and 450°C (0079). They teach that after the initial Mo layer is deposited, the feature is filled with Mo using a molybdenum oxyhalide precursor such as MoO2Cl2 and MoOCl4 using PEALD or PECVD with a reducing agent such as hydrogen (0081). They teach that plasma enhanced processes may be used to fill feature at lower temperatures and/or increase deposition rates (0081). They teach that in the fill process, the temperature of the substrate may be between 300°C and 500°C, e.g., between 350°C and 450°C (0093).
Therefore, Thombare teaches conformally depositing a molybdenum liner having a thickness overlapping the claimed range directly on a feature formed on a substrate surface, the feature having at least one surface defining a via comprising a bottom surface including a titanium silicide or metal material and two sidewalls including a low-k dielectric material; and depositing a molybdenum film directly on the molybdenum liner to fill the feature, where conformally depositing the molybdenum liner include exposing the feature of a molybdenum-containing precursor (MoCl5, 0015) and a reducing agent (hydrogen or silane) at a temperature overlapping the claimed range, and depositing the molybdenum film comprises exposing the feature to a molybdenum-containing precursor (MoOCl4 or MoO2Cl2) and a reducing agent such as hydrogen, silane, or ammonia, where the process can be plasma enhanced, such that the substrate will be exposed to a plasma the includes hydrogen, ammonia, or silane (reducing agents). They teach that the methods are used for source/drain contact fill (0064), such that the molybdenum liner and the molybdenum film on the liner on the bottom surface will form a metal contact.
They do not teach that the conformal film is deposited using a plasma-enhanced process.
Schloss teaches methods of filling features on a substrate with molybdenum by depositing a first layer of Mo in a feature including an opening and an interior, non-conformally treating the first layer, and depositing a second Mo layer on the treated layer (abstract and 0004). They teach filling features with Mo by controlling the precursor flux to transition between conformal and non-conformal fill (abstract and Fig. 6B). They teach depositing the film using molybdenum-containing precursors such as molybdenum pentachloride (MoCl5), molybdenum dioxide dichloride (MoO2Cl2), molybdenum oxytetrachloride (MoOCl4), and molybdenum hexacarbonyl (Mo(CO)6) (0082). They teach pulsing the Mo precursor such that the substrate will be exposed to the precursor and then exposing the precursor to a co-reactant which may be a reducing agent (0083). They teach that the reducing agent may be a plasma generated from H-2- (0083). They teach that the process can be used in one or both of operations 302 and 306 of Fig. 3 and in any operations in Fig. 6C (0083), where operation 302 is a conformal deposition (0052) and operation 306 is a deposition step to complete filling the structure (0057), and the depositions described in Fig. 6C include conformal and bottom-up filling (0076). They teach that another reducing agent other than hydrogen may be used (0065). Schloss teaches forming the Mo layer 108 on a dielectric layer 104, where examples of the dielectric layer include silicon oxide, silicon nitride, such as doped or undoped layers of SiO2 (0034-0035 and Fig. 1B). They teach that the methods are performed on a substrate housed in a process chamber (0037 and 0056).
From the teachings of Schloss, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the process of Thombare to have deposited the conformal layer using a plasma-enhanced process where the plasma is hydrogen or silane because Schloss teaches that conformal films can be deposited using plasma enhanced processes with the precursors and reducing agents of Thombare. Further, since Thombare teaches that plasma enhanced processes can be used to lower the deposition temperature, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have optimized the temperature to be within the claimed range from the range of Thombare (between 300°C and 500°C, e.g., between 350°C and 450°C (0079)), with the expectation of providing the conformal film at a lower temperature. Therefore, conformally forming the molybdenum liner will be done by exposing to one of the claimed molybdenum precursors (MoCl5) and a plasma that includes hydrogen or silane.
They do not each that the processing chamber comprise a multi-wafer processing chamber with a dual channel showerhead.
As discussed above, Arteaga, Yu, Parikh, and Ma provide the suggestion of using a processing chamber comprising a multi-wafer processing chamber including a plurality of processing stations, the processing chamber having a housing with walls, a bottom, and a top plate, the walls, the bottom, and the top plate defining an interior volume, a dual channel showerhead directly on the top plate, the dual channel showerhead comprising a first channel and a second channel, where the molybdenum-containing precursor flows through the first channel and the plasma flows through the second channel, with the molybdenum-containing precursor source and a plasma source on the dual channel showerhead on the top plate so as to provide a spatial ALD process improving the efficiency of the process while keeping the gases separate during the process.
They do not teach using a mixture of hydrogen and nitrogen plasma.
As discussed above, Thombare and Schloss teach using hydrogen plasma as the reactant and Arteaga teaches using a mixture of hydrogen, silane, and ammonia plasma, where N-2 plasma can also be used.
As discussed above, Gatineau teaches using a plasma mixture of silane, hydrogen, nitrogen, and ammonia as a reducing agent in a PEALD process for forming a molybdenum film.
From the teachings of Thombare, Schloss, Arteaga, and Gatineau, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used a combination of reducing agents or co-reactants in the plasma such as N2, H2, SiH4, and NH3 because Thombare and Schloss teach that hydrogen plasma can be used, Arteaga teaches that mixture of hydrogen, silane, and ammonia plasma can be used, where nitrogen plasma can also be used, and Gatineau teaches using a mixture of silane, nitrogen, hydrogen, and ammonia plasma as reducing agents to deposit a molybdenum film by a PEALD process, such that a plasma mixture of nitrogen, hydrogen, silane, and ammonia is expected to provide a suitable reducing agent mixture for reacting with the molybdenum precursor to form the molybdenum film.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/18/2026 have been fully considered.
In light of the amendments to the claims, the rejections have been modified as indicated above. Additionally, the previous 112(b) rejection has been withdrawn.
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 CHRISTINA D MCCLURE whose telephone number is (571)272-9761. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30-5:00 EST.
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 571-272-5166. 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.
/CHRISTINA D MCCLURE/Examiner, Art Unit 1718 /GORDON BALDWIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Prosecution Insights