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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fukazawa; Atsuki et al. (US 20180119283 A1). Fukazawa teaches a film forming apparatus (Figure 1-7), comprising: a processing container (3; Figure 1; [0051]) in which a substrate is accommodated; a gas supply (21,22; Figure 1; [0051]) configured to supply a raw material gas and a reactive gas into the processing container (3; Figure 1; [0051]); a radio frequency power (1MHz < f < 50MHz; [0030]) supply (25; Figure 1; [0051]) configured to output radio frequency power (1MHz < f < 50MHz; [0030]) for generating plasma inside the processing container (3; Figure 1; [0051]); and a controller (40; Figure 2-7; [0044]), wherein the controller (40; Figure 2-7; [0044]) controls the gas supply (21,22; Figure 1; [0051]) and the radio frequency power (1MHz < f < 50MHz; [0030]) supply (25; Figure 1; [0051]) to form a titanium (“metal-based precursor...Ti”; [0032]) film on the substrate is performed by an atomic layer deposition method ((i)-(iv); [0022]) that alternately (Figure 3,5; [0064]) performs an adsorption operation (PEALD; [0022]) of adsorbing the raw material gas onto a surface of the substrate by supplying the raw material gas into the processing container (3; Figure 1; [0051]) in which the substrate is accommodated, and a reaction operation ((v); [0022]) of supplying the reactive gas into the processing container (3; Figure 1; [0051]) to plasmarize the reactive gas and causing the plasmarized reactive gas to react with the raw material gas adsorbed onto the surface of the substrate, and wherein in the reaction operation ((v); [0022]), the reactive gas is plasmarized with the radio frequency power (1MHz < f < 50MHz; [0030]) having a frequency of 38 MHz or more and 60 MHz or less, as claimed by claim 1
Fukazawa further teaches:
The film forming apparatus (Figure 1-7) of Claim 11, wherein the gas supply (21,22; Figure 1; [0051]) supplies TiCl4 as the raw material gas and supplies H2 ([0033]) as the reactive gas, as claimed by claim 12. Fukazawa states in [0032] that Si can be replaced by Ti in the precursor equation:
H
a
S
i
b
R
c
where R is a “halogen”, a,b,c are “integers” which supports the use of titanium chloride by Fukazawa
The film forming apparatus (Figure 1-7) of Claim 12, further comprising an exhauster (“vacuum pump”; [0028]) configured to exhaust an interior of the processing container (3; Figure 1; [0051]), wherein the controller (40; Figure 2-7; [0044]) controls the gas supply (21,22; Figure 1; [0051]) and the exhauster (“vacuum pump”; [0028]) so that an internal pressure of the processing container (3; Figure 1; [0051]) in the process of forming the titanium (“metal-based precursor...Ti”; [0032]) film becomes 500 mTorr (66 kPa) or more and 5 Torr (666 kPa) or less, as claimed by claim 13. Fukazawa teaches the process pressure range of 112Torr (15kPa) < p < 600Torr (80kPa) – [0028] and 0.5kPa < P < 30kPa = 3.75Torr < P < 225Torr [0070]
The film forming apparatus (Figure 1-7) of Claim 11, further comprising an exhauster (“vacuum pump”; [0028]) configured to exhaust an interior of the processing container (3; Figure 1; [0051]), wherein the controller (40; Figure 2-7; [0044]) controls the gas supply (21,22; Figure 1; [0051]) and the exhauster (“vacuum pump”; [0028]) so that an internal pressure of the processing container (3; Figure 1; [0051]) in the process of forming the titanium (“metal-based precursor...Ti”; [0032]) film becomes 500 mTorr (66 kPa) or more and 5 Torr (666 kPa) or less, as claimed by claim 14. Fukazawa teaches the process pressure range of 112Torr (15kPa) < p < 600Torr (80kPa) – [0028] and 0.5kPa < P < 30kPa = 3.75Torr < P < 225Torr [0070].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 25, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant states:
“
First, Applicant submits that Fukazawa fails to disclose or suggest at least the feature of "wherein the controller controls the gas supply and the radio frequency power supply to form a titanium film on the substrate" as recited in amended Claim 11.
In the Office Action, the Examiner relied on paragraph [0032] of Fukazawa as evidence of disclosing the feature of "wherein the controller controls the gas supply mechanism and the radio frequency power supply so that a process of forming the metallic titanium film is performed" previously recited in Claim 11.
However, Fukazawa merely discloses in paragraph [0031] that the film deposited by subatmospheric PEALD is constituted by silicon or metal oxide, silicon or metal nitride, silicon or metal carbide, silicon or metal oxynitride, or silicon or metal carbonitride, and discloses in paragraph [0032] that a metal-based precursor can be used in place of silicon and Ti can be used as a metal.
“
In response, the Examiner has reconsidered Fukazawa and reaffirms that Fukazawa identically teaches Fukazawa’s controller (40; Figure 2-7; [0044]) controls the gas supply (21,22; Figure 1; [0051]) and the radio frequency power (1MHz < f < 50MHz; [0030]) supply (25; Figure 1; [0051]) to form a titanium (“metal-based precursor...Ti”; [0032]) film on the substrate is performed by an atomic layer deposition method ((i)-(iv); [0022]) that alternately (Figure 3,5; [0064]) performs an adsorption operation (PEALD; [0022]) of adsorbing the raw material gas onto a surface of the substrate by supplying the raw material gas into the processing container (3; Figure 1; [0051]) in which the substrate is accommodated, and a reaction operation ((v); [0022]) of supplying the reactive gas into the processing container (3; Figure 1; [0051]) to plasmarize the reactive gas and causing the plasmarized reactive gas to react with the raw material gas adsorbed onto the surface of the substrate, and wherein in the reaction operation ((v); [0022]), the reactive gas is plasmarized with the radio frequency power (1MHz < f < 50MHz; [0030]) having a frequency of 38 MHz or more and 60 MHz or less, as claimed by claim 1.
It is clear from Fukazawa’s specification that titanium (“metal-based precursor...Ti”; [0032]) film is formed by the claimed controller:
“
… In some embodiments, the precursors include, aminosilane such as bisdimethylaminosilane and bisdiethylaminosilane, silicon halide such as dichlorotetramethyldisilane and dimethyldichlorosilane, and silicon hydrocarbon such as divinyldimethylsilane and phenylsilane, … In some embodiments, in place of silicon, a metal-based precursor can be used. As for a metal, Ti, Zr, and/or Al can be used.
“ Fukazawa ([0032]), emphasis added.
Applicant states:
“
That is, Fukazawa merely discloses, as a film deposited by PEALD using a Ti- based precursor, a titanium oxide film, a titanium nitride film, a titanium carbide film, a titanium oxynitride film, and a titanium carbonitride film, which are different from the "titanium film" recited in amended Claim 11.
“
In response, the Examiner does not understand Applicant’s position. There is no such recitation in Fukazawa for such titanium films from silicon substituted precursors as taught by Fukazawa and emphasized above. However, that Fukazawa indeed will deposit a titanium film in the manner recited by the claimed controller is without question based on the Examiner’s interpretation of Fukazawa. Further, that Applicant disagrees that such a film including titanium as taught by Fukazawa is “different from the "titanium film" recited in amended Claim 11” is not understood and Applicant has not provided a rationale for such a conclusion.
Applicant states:
“
When the prior art discloses a range which touches or overlaps the claimed range, but no specific examples falling within the claimed range are disclosed, a case-by-case determination must be made as to anticipation. In order to anticipate the claims, the claimed subject matter must be disclosed in the reference with "sufficient specificity to constitute an anticipation under the statute."What constitutes a "sufficient specificity" is fact dependent. If the claims are directed to a narrow range, and the reference teaches a broader range, other facts of the case, must be considered when determining whether the narrow range is disclosed with "sufficient specificity" to constitute an anticipation of the claims.
“
And…
“
However, Fukazawa merely discloses "the RF power has a frequency of 1 kHz to 100 MHz, preferably 1 MHz to 50 MHz" in paragraph [0030]. In addition, Fukazawa merely discloses, as the only two specific examples of the frequency, "applying HRF power (13.56MHz or 27MHz)" in paragraph [0051] and "RF power (13.56MHz) for a 300-mm wafer" in TABLE 1 and TABLE 2, which do not overlap with the frequency range of "38 MHz or more and 60 MHz or less" recited in Claim 11.
“
In response, Applicant’s claimed range of radio frequency power having a frequency of 38 MHz or more and 60 MHz or less and Fukazawa’s radio frequency power (1MHz < f < 50MHz; [0030]) overlap. Applicant is welcomed to amend the claims to remove Fukazawa’s overlapping range. The above examples found by Fukazawa are only examples as stated by Fukazawa.
Applicants states:
“
In the Office Action, the Examiner relied on paragraph [0032] of Fukazswa as evidence of disclosing the feature of "wherein the gas supply mechanism supplies TiCs as the raw material gas and supplies H2 as the reactive gas" previously recited in Claim 11.
However, Fukazawa merely discloses in paragraph [0032] that "the precursor is selected from the group consisting of HaSibRe, R'aSibR2c, HaMeb, and RIaMebR2c, wherein R, RI, and R2 are (N(CxHy)H)z, (N(CxHy)2)z, (OCHy)z, halogen, OH, or non-cyclic or cyclic CxH, having double or triple bonds, R' and R2 are different, and a, b, c, x, y, and z are integers" and "in place of silicon, a metal-based precursor can be used. As for a metal, Ti, Zr, and/or Al can be used ."
That is, Fukazawa merely discloses HaTibRc and RiaTibR2c as a metal-based precursor when the metal is Ti, and fails to disclose or suggest the "TiCl4 as the raw material gas" recited in amended Claim 12.
“
In response, the Examiner disagrees and notes that Fukazawa teaches Fukazawa’s the gas supply (21,22; Figure 1; [0051]) supplies TiCl4 as the raw material gas and supplies H2 ([0033]) as the reactive gas, as claimed by claim 12. Fukazawa states in [0032] that Si can be replaced by Ti in the precursor equation:
H
a
S
i
b
R
c
where R is a “halogen”, a,b,c are “integers” which supports the use of titanium chloride by Fukazawa. Here, R = Cl, c = 4, a = 0.
Applicant states:
“
In the Office Action, the Examiner relied on paragraph [0028] of Fukazswa as evidence of disclosing the feature of "wherein the controller controls the gas supply mechanism and the exhaust mechanism so that an internal pressure of the processing container in the process offorming the metallic titanium film becomes 500 mTorr or more and 5 Torr or less" previously recited in Claims 13 and 14. Specifically, the Examiner asserted that Fukazawa discloses the process pressure range of 112 mTorr (15 kPa) < p < 600 mTorr (80 kPa).
However, since 1 Pa equals to approximately 7.5006x 103 Torr, the pressure range of "15 kPa to 80 kPa" disclosed in paragraph [00281 of Fukazawa is converted into "112 Torr to 600 Torr," which does not overlap with and is significantly greater than the pressure range of "500 mTorr or more and 5 Torr or less" recited in amended Claims 13 and 14.
“
the controller (40; Figure 2-7; [0044]) controls the gas supply (21,22; Figure 1; [0051]) and the exhauster (“vacuum pump”; [0028]) so that an internal pressure of the processing container (3; Figure 1; [0051]) in the process of forming the titanium (“metal-based precursor...Ti”; [0032]) film becomes 500 mTorr (66 kPa) or more and 5 Torr (666 kPa) or less, as claimed by claim 13. Fukazawa teaches the process pressure range of 112Torr (15kPa) < p < 600Torr (80kPa) – [0028]
In response, Applicant’s claimed pressure range is Claim 500mTorr < P < 5000mTorr while Fukazawa, in [0028] teaches processing pressure control in two (2) ranges:
1 < P < 10mTorr =
15kPa < P < 80kPa = 112Torr < P < 600Torr
However, Fukazawa also teaches in [0070] that lower pressure plasmas are feasible using helium instead of argon as the inert gas:
0.5kPa < P < 30kPa = 3.75Torr < P < 225Torr
As a result, Fukazawa’s pressure range falls inside the claimed range.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. PEALD is supported by references such as US 20150203967 A1; US 20250046599 A1; US 20190385815 A1.
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 Examiner Rudy Zervigon whose telephone number is (571) 272- 1442. The examiner can normally be reached on a Monday through Thursday schedule from 8am through 6pm EST. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Any Inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the Chemical and Materials Engineering art unit receptionist at (571) 272-1700. If the examiner cannot be reached please contact the examiner's supervisor, Parviz Hassanzadeh, at (571) 272- 1435.
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:/Awww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
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.
/Rudy Zervigon/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716