Attorney’s Docket Number: 81048.19200
Filing Date: 01/23/2023
Claimed Priority Date: 01/25/2022 (PRO 63/302,813)
Applicant(s): Samiee et al
Examiner: Aneesa Baig
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 . Pending in this Office Action are claims 1-20.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s elections without traverse of Group I Invention, directed to a method of forming a structure filed on 09/12/2025, is acknowledged. Accordingly, claims 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Pending in this Office Action are claims 1-17.
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.
Claims 1,2,7-10 ,15,17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tarafdar et al (WO 2021237032 A1-PDF provided, Hereinafter Tarafdar).
Regarding claim 1, Tarafdar (e.g., Fig 1-4, [0004]-[0010],[0035]-[0045]) discloses most aspects of the instant invention including, a method of forming a structure comprising a layer of metal carbon nitride (MCN) on a substrate, the method comprising:
providing the substrate (404 [0004]) within a reaction chamber;
forming a deposited metal carbon nitride layer (402, [0010] )on the substrate; and
mitigating loss of metal from the deposited metal carbon nitride layer comprising (e.g., metal halide process of removing a native oxide of WCN [0037]-[0039] ):
forming a treated metal carbon nitride surface comprising:
applying a surface treatment to the deposited metal carbon nitride layer (e.g., metal halide treatment to remove metal oxide layer, including titanium halide treatment [0039]-[0042]).
While Tarafdar does not explicitly say the metal halide surface treatment mitigates loss of metal, note that the instant disclosure ([0054]) shows the surface treatment on the metal carbon nitride layer (WCN, 402) may comprise providing a titanium halide, such as titanium tetrachloride, to the reaction chamber. Tarafur shows the metal carbon nitride layer and the native oxide formed from it is exposed to a metal halide, such as a Ti halide, specifically a titanium tetrachloride to clean the surface and promote better adhesion to the subsequent metal and reduce resistivity. Since the instant application discloses that a titanium tetrachloride treatment may mitigate loss of metal, the surface treatment of Tarafdur may also be capable of preventing loss of metal from the metal carbon nitride surface.
Accordingly, as the mechanisms of Tarafdur and the instant application are similar, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have the surface treatment of Tarafdur to also mitigate loss of metal form the metal carbon nitride layer and form a low resistivity electrode.
Regarding Claim 2, Tarafdur shows surface treatment includes providing a inorganic reactant to the chamber (e.g., metal halide, titanium tetrachloride specifically is inorganic [0041]).
Regarding Claim 7, See comments from Paragraphs 3-5 from Claim 1, as they would be considered repeated here.
Regarding Claim 8, See comments from Paragraphs 3-5 from Claim 1, as they would be considered repeated here.
Regarding Claim 9, See comments from Paragraphs 3-5 from Claim 1, as they would be considered repeated here.
Regarding Claim 10, Tarafdur shows the surface treatment comprises a plasma process ([0093]).
Regarding Claim 15, Tarafdur shows the pressure within the chamber to be between 0.2 torr to 760 torr ([0042]).
Regarding Claim 17, Tarafdur shows the metal carbon nitride is a tungsten carbon nitride ([0010], [0030]).
Claims 1,4,10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon et al (US 20070128775 A1, Hereinafter Jeon).
Regarding claim 1, Jeon (e.g., Fig1-3, [0048],[0053]-[0060],) discloses most aspects of the instant invention including, a method of forming a structure comprising a layer of metal carbon nitride (MCN) on a substrate, the method comprising:
providing the substrate (100, 104 Fig 1) within a reaction chamber ([0054]
forming a deposited metal carbon nitride layer (tungsten carbon nitride layer 106 [0054] )on the substrate; and
forming a treated metal carbon nitride surface comprising ([0058]):
applying a surface treatment to the deposited metal carbon nitride layer ([0058]).
While Jeon does not explicitly show the WCN post-treatment results in mitigating loss of metal, note that the instant disclosure ([0010]) shows the surface treatment on the metal carbon nitride layer may comprise a plasma process including nitrogen-containing reactant or hydrogen-containing reactant. Jeon prepares the WCN layer using a plasma method including nitrogen or hydrogen reactants to form a layer with sufficient oxidation resistance for suppressing an oxidation process and reduce corrosion problems. ([0048], [0059]). Since the instant application discloses a similar plasma post-treatment process for the purpose of mitigating metal loss, the process of Jeon may also be capable of preventing loss of metal from the metal carbon nitride surface.
Accordingly, as the mechanisms of Jeon and the instant application are similar, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have the surface treatment of Jeon to also mitigate loss of metal from the metal carbon nitride layer.
Regarding Claim 4, Jeon shows the surface treatment comprises providing a nitrogen containing reactant and/or a hydrogen- containing reactant([0086]).
Regarding Claim 10, Jeon shows a plasma process [0058).
Claims 1,4,5,12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al (US 20250051908 A1, Hereinafter Chen).
Regarding claim 1, Chen (e.g., Fig1, Fig 2A-Fig 2F, [0032]-[0050],[0035]-[0045],[0085]-[0091],[0097]) discloses most aspects of the instant invention including, a method of forming a structure comprising a layer of metal carbon nitride (MCN) on a substrate, the method comprising:
providing the substrate (operation 101, features 207,213 [0031]) within a reaction chamber ([0033]);
forming a deposited metal carbon nitride layer (liner layer WCN 221 in operation 105 from Fig 1 [0034]-[0037] )on the substrate; and
forming a treated metal carbon nitride surface comprising (e.g., operation 107):
applying a surface treatment to the deposited metal carbon nitride layer (e.g., exposure to plasma or a heated process [0037]).
While Chen does not explicitly show the WCN post-treatment results in mitigating loss of metal, note that the instant disclosure ([0054]) shows the surface treatment on the metal carbon nitride layer may comprise a heated process rather than a plasma. Chen shows the metal carbon nitride layer to be exposed to a high temperature anneal to help with adhesion and increasing grain size of the subsequent layer. Since the instant application discloses a thermal process, the heated process of Chen may also be capable of preventing loss of metal from the metal carbon nitride surface.
Further, Chen shows an inhibition process post deposition of a WCN layer ([0085]-[0091]) to by passivating a surface used to tune a feature profile. Where the inhibition process exposing the feature to a nitrogen-containing compound such as ammonia (NH.sub.3) or hydrazine (N.sub.2H.sub.4) to non-conformally inhibit the feature near the feature opening. While this process is used for selectively depositing future metal layers, note that the instant disclosure shows that a surface treatment on a metal carbon nitride layer may comprise providing a hydrazine ([0053]) or a nitrogen-containing reactant ([0040]) to the reaction chamber. Since the instant application discloses the hydrazine or nitrogen treatment may mitigate loss of metal, the surface treatment of Chen ([0086]) may also be capable of preventing loss of metal from the metal carbon nitride surface.
Accordingly, as the mechanisms of Chen and the instant application are similar, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have the surface treatment of Chen to also mitigate loss of metal from the metal carbon nitride layer.
Regarding Claim 4, Chen shows the surface treatment comprises providing a nitrogen containing reactant ([0086]).
Regarding Claim 5, Chen shows the surface treatment comprises providing hydrazine ([0086]).
Regarding Claim 12, See comments from Paragraph 24 from Claim 4, as they would be considered repeated here
Regarding Claim 13, See comments from Paragraph 24 from Claim 4, as they would be considered repeated here.
Regarding Claim 14, See comments from Paragraph 19-23 from Claim 1, as they would be considered repeated here.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3,6,11,16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANEESA RIAZ BAIG whose telephone number is (571)272-0249. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm 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, Wael Fahmy can be reached on 571-272-1705. 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.
/ANEESA RIAZ BAIG/Examiner, Art Unit 2814 /WAEL M FAHMY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2814
Prosecution Insights