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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04/01/2026 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
This is a non-final office action in response to the applicant’s arguments and remarks filed on 04/01/2026. Claims 1, 3-14, and 16-20 are pending in the current office action. Claims 1 and 16 have been amended by the applicant. Claims 17-20 remain withdrawn. Claims 2 and 15 are cancelled.
Status of the Rejection
The rejection of claim 15 is obviated by the Applicant’s cancellation.
All 35 U.S.C. § 102 and 103 rejections from the previous office action are withdrawn in view of the Applicant’s amendment.
New grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are necessitated by the amendments.
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 1, 3-4, 7-9, and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hatazaki et al. (US-20200192004-A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Hatazaki teaches a substrate treating method (Paragraph [0008] method of forming and treating microlens on a substrate. Paragraph [0003] teaches that a C-MOS might be the imaging element comprising the microlens), comprising:
inserting a substrate into a substrate treating apparatus, the substrate being a lens module of a complementary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS) image sensor (Paragraph [0008] method of forming and treating microlens on a substrate. Paragraph [0003] teaches that a C-MOS might be the imaging element comprising the microlens for the taught method. Paragraph [0081] substrate is loading into the chamber of the plasma processing apparatus);
injecting a first process gas into the substrate treating apparatus (Paragraph [0082] first process gas can be considered to comprise CF4 which is supplied to the chamber of the plasma processing apparatus);
generating a first plasma within the substrate treating apparatus using the first process gas (Paragraph [0082] a plasma is formed from the CF4 gas);
etching the substrate using the first plasma (Paragraph [0082] etching is performed using the plasma of the CF4 gas);
injecting, after the etching using the first plasma, a second process gas and the first process gas into the substrate treating apparatus to generate a mix of the first process gas and the second process gas within the substrate treating apparatus (Paragraph [0084] a flow of CF4, which can be considered the first process gas, and a flow of another gas is supplied to the chamber. Paragraph [0093] the other gas, which can be considered a component of the second process gas can include C4F6, C4F8, CHF3, CH2F2, CH3F, and/or CH4);
generating a second plasma within the substrate treating apparatus using the mix of the first process gas and the second process gas process gas (Paragraph [0084] a plasma is formed from the mixed gas); and
coating, after etching the substrate using the first plasma, the substrate using the second plasma to deposit polymer onto a pattern formed on a surface of the substrate formed after the etching using the first plasma such that the deposition of the polymer changes a first pattern roughness of the pattern to a second pattern roughness that is smoother than the first pattern roughness (Paragraph [0084] material is deposited on the surface of the microlenses. Paragraph [0071] more material is deposited in the concave portions than on the convex portions of the substrate - as seen in Figures 5B and 5D, this results in making the pattern on the substrate smoother),
wherein at least some components of the second process gas differ from those of the first process gas (Paragraph [0082] first process gas can be considered to comprise CF4. Paragraph [0093] the second process gas includes CF4 and one or more additional gases, which are not included in the first process gas).
Regarding Claim 3, Hatazaki teaches wherein the second process gas includes a first component that is also included in the first process gas and a second component that is not included in the first process gas (Paragraph [0082] first process gas can be considered to comprise CF4. Paragraph [0093] a flow of CF4 and a flow of an additional gas is supplied to the chamber, where the second process gas can be considered to comprise CF4 and an additional gas, where CF4 can be considered the claimed "first component" which is present in the first process gas, and the additional gas can be considered the claimed "second component" that is not included in the first process gas).
Regarding Claim 4, Hatazaki teaches wherein the first component is a fluorine component, and the second component is a hydrogen component (Paragraph [0082] first process gas can be considered to comprise CF4, which can be considered a fluorine component. Paragraph [0093] the second process gas can include CHF3, CH2F2, CH3F, and/or CH4, any of which could be considered a hydrogen component).
Regarding Claim 7, Hatazaki teaches wherein the first process gas is an etching gas and the second process gas is a deposition gas (Paragraph [0082] first process gas is supplied for an etching process. Paragraph [0084] second process gas is supplied for a deposition process).
Regarding Claim 8, Hatazaki teaches wherein the first process gas is CF4 gas, and the second process gas is CHF3 gas (Paragraph [0082] first process gas can be considered to comprise CF4. Paragraph [0093] the second process gas can include CHF3).
Regarding Claim 9, Hatazaki teaches wherein the second process gas is mixed with the first process gas and then injected into the substrate treating apparatus (Paragraphs [0030-0035] Figure 1 gas supply sources (elements 48a, 48b, and 48c) supply gases that mix in the pipe (element 47), gas introduction port (element 46), and diffusion chamber (element 43) before passing through the gas discharge ports (elements 42a) into the chamber (element 21)).
Regarding Claim 12, Hatazaki teaches wherein the substrate treating apparatus comprises:
a first process gas supply source configured to supply the first process gas (Paragraphs [0030-0035] Figure 1 gas supply sources (elements 48a, 48b, and 48c) supply gases, one of these can be considered equivalent to the first process gas supply source);
a second process gas supply source configured to supply the second process gas (Paragraphs [0030-0035] Figure 1 gas supply sources (elements 48a, 48b, and 48c) supply gases, a second one of these can be considered equivalent to the second process gas supply source); and a process gas supplying line having one end connected to the substrate treating apparatus and the other end branched and connected to the first process gas supply source and the second process gas supply source, respectively (pipe (element 47), gas introduction port (element 46), and diffusion chamber (element 43) can be considered the claimed process gas supplying line, and are branched to connect the gas supply sources and connect to the chamber (element 21) through the gas discharge ports (elements 42a)),
wherein the second process gas is mixed with the first process gas when moving via the process gas supplying line (The gases from the different gas supply sources would mix in the pipe (element 47), gas introduction port (element 46), and diffusion chamber (element 43) when supplied from multiple gas supply sources simultaneously).
Regarding Claim 13, Hatazaki teaches wherein one of the first process gas and the second process gas is supplied via a first hole formed to penetrate an upper cover of the substrate treating apparatus, and the other gas is supplied via a second hole formed to penetrate a sidewall of the substrate treating apparatus, or the first process gas and the second process gas are supplied via one of the first hole and the second hole (Paragraphs [0030-0035] Figure 1 process gases are supplied by passing through the gas discharge ports (elements 42a), which in an upper cover of the chamber (element 21) and one of which can be considered equivalent to the claimed "first hole").
Regarding Claim 14, Hatazaki teaches wherein the substrate treating method includes an etch back process (Paragraph [0085] the process includes a trimming process that etches back the deposited material).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hatazaki in view of Puech et al. (US-20050103749-A1).
Regarding Claim 5 and 6, Hatazaki teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as outlined above.
Hatazaki fails to teach flow rates for the first and second process gases outside of a single example provided for each process, and therefore fails to teach wherein the second process gas is injected in a larger amount than the first process gas, as required by claim 5, and wherein the injection amount of the second process gas is 1.5 to 2 times greater than the injection amount of the first process gas, as required by claim 6.
Puech teaches methods related to etching in semiconductor manufacturing (Paragraph [0002]). Puech teaches a process where a first step of etching is conducted using a plasma of CF4 gas (Paragraph [0050] step a) comprises using plasma from a CF4 gas to etch a substrate) and a second step is conducted of treating a substrate with a plasma of CHF3 (Paragraph [0053] step b) comprises using a plasma of CHF3 to treat the substrate). Puech teaches that during the first step the flow rate of the process gas can be 10-200sccm (Paragraph [0052]). Puech teaches that during the second step the flow rate of the process gas can be 50-300 sccm (Paragraph [0053]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the method of Hatazaki by selecting flow rates for the first and second process gases from within the range of flow rates taught by Puech.
This modification would have been obvious as it would have been the combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. This combination would have yielded the predictable result of providing suitable flow rates for a first and second process gas used in processing a substrate. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have selected and incorporated a flow rate for first process gas at a level within the disclosed range of 10-200sccm and a flow rate for the second process gas at a level within the disclosed range of 50-300sccm, including at amounts that overlap with the claimed result that the flow rate for the second process gas is injected in a larger amount than the first process gas, as required by claim 5, and the claimed result that the second process gas has 1.5 to 2 times greater injection amount compared to the first process gas, as required by claim 6. It has been held that obviousness exists where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Claim 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hatazaki in view of Zhou et al. (US-20200243326-A1).
Regarding Claim 10, Hatazaki teaches all the limitations of claims 1 as outlined above.
Hatazaki fails to teach wherein the second process gas is injected into the substrate treating apparatus separately from the first process gas.
Zhou teaches a processing apparatus that can be used for performing etching processes (Paragraph [0028]). Zhou teaches that the processing apparatus can have a first gas injector that supplies gas from the top of the chamber and a second gas injector that supplies gas from the side of the chamber (Paragraph [0036] Figure 1 a first gas injector (element 104) is on the top of the plasma chamber (element 132) and a second gas injector (element 110) is on the side of the plasma chamber). Zhou teaches that gas can be supplied from each gas injector and that which gas is supplied to which injector can be controlled (Paragraph [0037-0038] both the first and second gas injectors can be used in some processes, manifolds control which gases are supplied to which gas supply lines).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the method of Hatazaki by utilizing a processing apparatus as taught by Zhou, capable of injecting process gases separately into the processing chamber, and utilizing this capability to inject the first process gas separately from the second process gas, as taught by Zhou.
This modification would have been obvious as it would have been the combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. This combination would have had the predictable result of providing a method to suitably supply two processes gases into a processing chamber for use in a single process. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Regarding Claim 11, Hatazaki teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 9 as outlined above.
Hatazaki fails to teach wherein the substrate treating apparatus comprises: a process gas supply source configured to supply the first process gas and the second process gas; and a process gas supplying line configured to connect the process gas supply source and the substrate treating apparatus, wherein the second process gas is mixed with the first process gas in the process gas supply source.
Zhou teaches a processing apparatus that can be used for performing etching processes (Paragraph [0028]). Zhou teaches that the processing apparatus contains a delivery system (Paragraphs [0037-0038] Figure 1 a delivery system (element 128) supplies gas to the chamber (element 132)). Zhou teaches that the gas supply is controlled and that gases can be mixed prior to injection in the chamber (Paragraphs [0036-0037] gas may be introduced into the chamber mixed with other gas before introduction. Manifolds control mixing gases in the delivery system prior to delivery into the chamber).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the method of Hatazaki by utilizing a processing apparatus as taught by Zhou that contained a process gas supply source that was capable of mixing a first and second process gas within the process gas supply source and supplying the mixed gas to the processing chamber.
This modification would have been obvious as it would have been the combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. This combination would have had the predictable result of providing a method and apparatus to suitably supply two processes gases that had been mixed together into a processing chamber for use in a single process. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Claim 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hatazaki in view of Puech and Roberts et al. (US-10361092-B1).
Regarding Claim 16, Hatazaki teaches a substrate treating method (Paragraph [0008] method of forming and treating microlens on a substrate. Paragraph [0003] teaches that a C-MOS might be the imaging element comprising the microlens), comprising:
inserting a substrate into a substrate treating apparatus, the substrate being a lens module of a complementary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS) image sensor (Paragraph [0008] method of forming and treating microlens on a substrate. Paragraph [0003] teaches that a C-MOS might be the imaging element comprising the microlens for the taught method. Paragraph [0081] substrate is loading into the chamber of the plasma processing apparatus);
injecting a first process gas into the substrate treating apparatus (Paragraph [0082] first process gas can be considered to comprise CF4 which is supplied to the chamber of the plasma processing apparatus);
generating a first plasma within the substrate treating apparatus using the first process gas (Paragraph [0082] a plasma is formed from the CF4 gas);
etching the substrate using the first plasma (Paragraph [0082] etching is performed using the plasma of the CF4 gas);
after the etching using the first plasma, injecting the first process gas into the substrate treating apparatus while additionally injecting a second process gas into the substrate treating apparatus to generate a mix of the first process gas and the second process gas within the substrate treating apparatus (Paragraph [0084] a flow of CF4, which can be considered the first process gas, and a flow of another gas is supplied to the chamber. Paragraph [0093] the other gas, which can be considered a component of the second process gas can include C4F6, C4F8, CHF3, CH2F2, CH3F, and/or CH4);
generating a second plasma within the substrate treating apparatus using the mix of the first process gas and the second process gas process gas (Paragraph [0084] a plasma is formed from the mixed gas); and
coating the substrate, after etching the substrate using the first plasma, using the second plasma to deposit polymer onto a pattern formed on a surface of the substrate such that the deposition of the polymer changes a first pattern roughness on the surface of the lens module formed after the etching using the first plasma to a second pattern roughness that is smoother than the first pattern roughness (Paragraph [0084] material is deposited on the surface of the microlenses. Paragraph [0071] more material is deposited in the concave portions than on the convex portions of the substrate - as seen in Figures 5B and 5D, this results in making the pattern on the substrate smoother),
wherein the second process gas includes a first component that is also included in the first process gas and a second component that is not included in the first process gas (Paragraph [0082] first process gas can be considered to comprise CF4. Paragraph [0084] a flow of CF4 and a flow of another gas, which is not included in the first process gas),
the first component is a fluorine component and the second component is a hydrogen component (Paragraph [0082] first process gas can be considered to comprise CF4 and CF4 can be considered a fluorine component. Paragraph [0093] the second process gas can include CHF3, CH2F2, CH3F, and/or CH4, any of which could be considered a hydrogen component).
Hatazaki fails to teach that the first process gas is injected continuously after etching the substrate with the first plasma.
Roberts teaches methods related to forming semiconductor devices that include etching steps (Column 1 lines 5-10 and 25-30). Roberts teaches a method that includes multiple etch steps where the first etch step utilizes a first etch gas and the second etch step utilizes the first etch gas and an additional process gas not used in the first etch step and teaches that the first etch gas is continuously flowed during both etching steps (Column 6 lines 8-31 Figure 5 A first etch step is conducted using a plasma formed from the first etch gas, then while the first etch gas continuously flows the second etch gas is supplied to conduct a second, further etching).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the method Hatazaki by flowing the first etchant gas, that is utilized in both the first and second etching steps within the method, continuously during the time those methods are conducted as taught by Roberts.
This modification would have been obvious as it would have been the combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. This combination would have had a predictable result of proving a suitable method of supplying a single gas that was used in two successive process steps. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Hatazaki fails to teach that the second process gas is injected in a larger amount than the first process gas.
Puech teaches methods related to etching in semiconductor manufacturing (Paragraph [0002]). Puech teaches a process where a first step of etching is conducted using a plasma of CF4 gas (Paragraph [0050] step a) comprises using plasma from a CF4 gas to etch a substrate) and a second step is conducted of treating a substrate with a plasma of CHF3 (Paragraph [0053] step b) comprises using a plasma of CHF3 to treat the substrate). Puech teaches that during the first step the flow rate of the process gas can be 10-200sccm (Paragraph [0052]). Puech teaches that during the second step the flow rate of the process gas can be 50-300 sccm (Paragraph [0053]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the method of Hatazaki by selecting flow rates for the first and second process gases from within the range of flow rates taught by Puech.
This modification would have been obvious as it would have been the combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. This combination would have yielded the predictable result of providing suitable flow rates for a first and second process gas used in processing a substrate. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have selected and incorporated a flow rate for first process gas at a level within the disclosed range of 10-200sccm and a flow rate for the second process gas at a level within the disclosed range of 50-300sccm, including at amounts that overlap with the claimed result that the flow rate for the second process gas is injected in a larger amount than the first process gas. It has been held that obviousness exists where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks Pg. 1-3, filed 04/01/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. § 102 and 103 rejections have been 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 ANDREW KEELAN LAOBAK whose telephone number is (703)756-5447. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00am - 5:30pm.
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, Joshua Allen can be reached at 571-270-3176. 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.
/A.K.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1713 /DUY VU N DEO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713
Prosecution Insights