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 .
Status of the Application
The Amendment filed on 11/19/2025, responding to the Office action mailed on 8/26/2025, has been entered into the record. The present Office action is made with all the suggested amendments being fully considered. Accordingly, claims 1-2, 6-8, 10-11, 13-15, 17, and 19-20 and new claims 21-25 are pending in this application.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 11 states “plasma” twice to end the sentence with, “…containing plasma is a conductively coupled plasma (CCP) plasma.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-2, 6-8, 17, 19-20, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 on page 2 line 7 states, “…exposing a first portion of a metal layer on a semiconductor substrate to the hydrogen plasma to treat the first portion of the metal layer without treating a second portion of the metal layer, the semiconductor substrate comprising a feature extending a depth from a top surface to a bottom surface and having sidewall surfaces therebetween, the metal layer formed on the sidewall surfaces and the bottom surface…” The claim limitation appears to be drawn to layer 240 being deposited on sidewalls of 220 in FIG. 2C. The figures do not show a metal layer being deposited onto a bottom surface or sidewalls of what the specification calls the substrate, 210. Based on the specification [0038] the only part of semiconductor device 200 that is part of the substrate is 210 in FIG. 2A.
Claim 17 on page 4 line 10 states, “…providing a substrate having a feature with a tungsten layer thereon, the feature extending a depth from a top surface to a bottom surface, the feature bounded by two sidewalls, the tungsten layer being formed on at least the two sidewalls and the bottom surface of the feature…” The figures do not show a tungsten layer being deposited onto a bottom surface or sidewalls of what the specification calls the substrate, 210. Based on the specification [0038] the only part of semiconductor device 200 that is part of the substrate is 210 in FIG. 2A.
For compact prosecution, the examiner interprets dielectric layer 220 to be part of the substrate.
Claims 2, 6-8, and 23-25 are rejected for depending on claim 1, and claims 19-20 and 22 are rejected for depending on claim 17. The claim limitation appears to be drawn to layer 240 being deposited on sidewalls of 220 in FIG. 2C.
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.
Claim 1, 7-8, 10, 14-15, 21, and 23-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seo et al. (US 20040082167 A1) in view of Chandrashekar et al. (US 20130171822, IDS).
Re Claim 1 Seo teaches a method for processing a semiconductor device (FIG. 2C), the method comprising:
generating a hydrogen plasma [0025] within a processing region (region under arrows, FIG. 2C), the hydrogen plasma formed from a hydrogen gas ([0025] last sentence) (H2);
exposing a first portion of a metal layer (31) [0026] on a semiconductor substrate (21) [0022] to the hydrogen plasma (FIG. 2C) to treat the first portion (31b) of the metal layer (31) without treating a second portion of the metal layer (31a), the semiconductor substrate (21, 23, and 227, [0022-0023], use dielectric 27 as part of substrate 21 as applied in FIG. 2G of present application) comprising a feature extending a depth from a top surface to a bottom surface (trench in FIG. 2C extends to bottom of 27 in vertical cross section) and having sidewall surfaces therebetween, the metal layer (31a) formed on the sidewall surfaces and the bottom surface (FIG. 2C); and
selectively forming a metal film (33) on the second portion of the metal layer (31).
Seo does not explicitly teach hydrogen gas provided at a flow rate of at least 300 sccm and a partial pressure of at least 100 mTorr.
Seo does teach hydrogen gas is provided at 1500 sccm and a pressure of 5 Torr [0034].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching as taught by Seo into the structure of Seo.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Seo in the above manner for the motivation of finding optimal hydrogen gas flow rate and pressure.
Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In the instant case, process optimization will allow one of ordinary skill in the art to reach ideal hydrogen gas flow rate and pressure.
Seo does not teach a thickness in a range of about 30 A to about 50 A of the metal film forms on the second portion of the metal layer before the metal film forms on the first portion.
Chandrashekar teaches forming a metal film (653) [0054] on the second portion (bottom half of trench, see image below) of the metal layer (113, [0054] states, “…113, which can be, for example, a metal nitride or other barrier layer.” Metal is a known barrier layer material) before the metal film forms on the first portion ([0054] states, “Deposition continues, in some embodiments with one or more selective inhibition cycles, until the feature is filled.” Implying the top surface is covered in with 653 material after the bottom of the trench). Using FIG. 6 fragment below shows the layer 653 is about half way up the trench sidewalls which is comparable to the enclosed invention)
Chandrashekar FIG. 6 fragment shown below with L1 line added for reference
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching as taught by Chandrashekar into the structure of Seo since Chandrashekar uses a deposition process to integrate a metal film into a semiconductor device
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Chandrashekar in combination with Seo in the above manner for the motivation of depositing the optimal amount of the metal film layer. [0002] states, “Deposition of tungsten-containing materials using chemical vapor deposition (CVD) techniques is an integral part of many semiconductor fabrication processes.”
Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In the instant case, process optimization will allow one of ordinary skill in the art to reach optimal metal film thickness at the bottom of the trench.
Re Claim 7 Seo in view of Chandrashekar teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the metal film (Chandrashekar, 653) comprises tungsten [0054].
Re Claim 8 Seo in view of Chandrashekar teaches the method of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach the metal film forms on the second portion of the metal layer for a time of less than 10 seconds before forming on the first portion of the metal layer.
Chandrashekar [0050] teaches, “Example exposure times can range from about 10 s to 500 s, depending on desired selectivity and feature depth.” Therefore, the exposure time can potentially be under 10 seconds indicating the second portion of the metal layer (FIG. 6 top right) can be formed less than 10s after forming the first portion of the metal layer (FIG. 6 bottom left).
Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In the instant case, process optimization will allow one of ordinary skill in the art to reach ideal time to wait between forming portions of a layer.
Re Claim 10 Seo teaches a method of bottom-up metal gap fill, the method comprising:
exposing a metal nucleation layer (31, [0026] “metal layer”) to ions from a hydrogen-containing plasma (Fig. 2C, [0025] last sentence) to form a treated portion of the metal nucleation layer (31b), the metal nucleation layer (31a) being formed on sidewall surfaces and a bottom surface of a feature (trench), the feature extending a depth from a top to the bottom surface and having the sidewall surfaces therebetween (FIG. 2C), the treated portion (31b where it meets 31a) being located on the sidewall surfaces near the top (FIG. 2C), the hydrogen plasma formed from a hydrogen gas ([0025] last sentence) (H2), and
forming a metal film (33) [0027] on an untreated portion of the metal nucleation layer (31a) on the bottom surface (bottom of trench in FIG. 2D).
Seo does not explicitly teach a flow rate of at least 300 sccm and a partial pressure of at least 100 mTorr.
Seo does teach hydrogen gas is provided at 1500 sccm and a pressure of 5 Torr [0034].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching as taught by Seo into the structure of Seo.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Seo in the above manner for the motivation of finding optimal hydrogen gas flow rate and pressure.
Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In the instant case, process optimization will allow one of ordinary skill in the art to reach ideal hydrogen gas flow rate and pressure.
Seo does not teach a thickness in a range of about 30 A to about 50 A of the metal film forms on the second portion of the metal nucleation layer before the metal film forms on the treated portion.
Chandrashekar teaches forming a metal film (653) [0054] on the second portion (bottom half of trench, see image below) of the metal nucleation layer (113, [0018] states, “The under-layer 113 can be for example, a diffusion barrier layer, an adhesion layer, a nucleation layer…” [0054] states, “…113, which can be, for example, a metal nitride or other barrier layer.” Metal is a known barrier layer material) before the metal film forms on the treated portion ([0054] states, “Deposition continues, in some embodiments with one or more selective inhibition cycles, until the feature is filled.” Implying the top surface is covered in with 653 material after the bottom of the trench). Using FIG. 6 fragment below Claim 1 shows the layer 653 is about half way up the trench sidewalls which is comparable to the enclosed invention).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching as taught by Chandrashekar into the structure of Seo since Chandrashekar uses a deposition process to integrate a metal film into a semiconductor device
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Chandrashekar in combination with Seo in the above manner for the motivation of depositing the optimal amount of the metal film layer. [0002] states, “Deposition of tungsten-containing materials using chemical vapor deposition (CVD) techniques is an integral part of many semiconductor fabrication processes.”
Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In the instant case, process optimization will allow one of ordinary skill in the art to reach optimal metal film thickness at the bottom of the trench.
Re Claim 14 Seo in view of Chandrashekar teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the metal film (Chandrashekar, 653) comprises tungsten [0054].
Re Claim 15 Seo in view of Chandrashekar teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the metal film (Seo, 33) contains substantially no seam or voids (FIG. 2D).
Re Claim 21 Seo in view of Chandrashekar teaches the method of claim 10, but does not teach the metal film forms on the untreated portion of the metal nucleation layer for a time of less than 10 seconds before the metal film forms on the treated portion of the metal nucleation layer.
Seo in view of Chandrashekar teaches (Chandrashekar [0050]), “Example exposure times can range from about 10 s to 500 s, depending on desired selectivity and feature depth.” Therefore, the exposure time can potentially be under 10 seconds indicating the second portion of the metal film (653, FIG. 6 top right) can be formed less than 10s after forming the first portion of the metal film (FIG. 6 bottom left).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching as taught by Chandrashekar into the structure of Seo in view of Chandrashekar.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Chandrashekar in the above manner for the motivation of finding optimal waiting times between layer deposition.
Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In the instant case, process optimization will allow one of ordinary skill in the art to reach ideal time to wait between forming portions of a layer.
Re Claim 23 Seo in view of Chandrashekar teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising repeating the method (Chandrashekar [0054] states, “Deposition continues, in some embodiments with one or more selective inhibition cycles, until the feature is filled.”) to fill the feature (trench) with the metal film (653, FIG. 6 bottom/center).
Re Claim 24 Seo in view of Chandrashekar teaches the method of claim 23, wherein the metal film (Seo, 33) fills the feature with substantially no seam or void (FIG. 2D).
Re Claim 25 Seo in view of Chandrashekar teaches the method of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach the metal layer has an overhang over the feature of less than or equal to about 50 A.
Seo in view of Chandrashekar does teach (Chandrashekar, [0017]), “In some embodiments, the feature hole 105 may have an aspect ratio of at least about 2:1, at least about 4:1, at least about 6:1 or higher. The feature hole 105 may also have a dimension near the opening, e.g., an opening diameter or line width, of between about 10 nm to 500 nm…” Set the width to form the overhang region (top, center, FIG. 1B)is than or equal to 50A (50A = 5 nm).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching as taught by Chandrashekar into the structure of Seo in view of Chandrashekar.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Chandrashekar in the above manner for the motivation of finding optimal tungsten layer overhang distance.
Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In the instant case, process optimization will allow one of ordinary skill in the art to reach ideal tungsten layer overhang dimensions.
Claims 2 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seo et al. (US 20040082167 A1) in view of Chandrashekar et al. (US 20130171822, IDS) and Mallick et al. (US 20180323068 A1).
Re Claim 2 Seo in view of Chandrashekar teaches the method of claim 1, but does not teach the hydrogen plasma is a conductively coupled plasma (CCP).
Mallick teaches the hydrogen plasma [0027] is a conductively coupled plasma (CCP) ([0025] last sentence).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching as taught by Mallick into the structure of Seo in view of Chandrashekar since Mallick integrates plasma into a semiconductor building process.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Mallick in combination with Seo in view of Chandrashekar in the above manner for the motivation of optimizing the hydrogen plasma process to allow for chip designs that are as small as possible. [0004] states, “There is a need in the art for new methods for chip designs with smaller critical dimensions.”
Re Claim 11 Seo in view of Chandrashekar teaches the method of claim 10, but does not teach the hydrogen- containing plasma is a conductively coupled plasma (CCP) plasma.
Mallick teaches the hydrogen- containing plasma [0027] is a conductively coupled plasma (CCP) plasma ([0025] last sentence).
Claims 6 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seo et al. (US 20040082167 A1) in view of Chandrashekar et al. (US 20130171822, IDS) and Zope et al. (US 20210054500 A1).
Re Claim 6 Seo in view of Chandrashekar teaches the method of claim 1, but does not teach the metal layer is a tungsten nucleation layer.
Zope teaches the metal layer (512, FIG. 5C) is a tungsten nucleation layer ([0168] states, “512 comprises…a tungsten oxide nucleation film…”).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching as taught by Zope into the structure of Seo in view of Chandrashekar since Zope integrates tungsten as the material for a metal layer into a semiconductor building process.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Zope in combination with Seo in view of Chandrashekar in the above manner for the motivation of using a tungsten material for the nucleation layer as it desirable in the art of semiconductor processing. [0006] states, “In addition, in particular semiconductor fabrication processes, it may be desirable to form a metal film…”
Re Claim 13 Seo in view of Chandrashekar teaches the method of claim 10, but does not teach the metal nucleation layer is a tungsten nucleation layer.
Zope teaches the metal nucleation layer (512, FIG. 5C) is a tungsten nucleation layer ([0168] states, “512 comprises…a tungsten oxide nucleation film…”).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching as taught by Zope into the structure of Seo in view of Chandrashekar since Zope integrates tungsten as the material for a metal layer into a semiconductor building process.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Zope in combination with Seo in view of Chandrashekar in the above manner for the motivation of using a tungsten material for the nucleation layer as it desirable in the art of semiconductor processing. [0006] states, “In addition, in particular semiconductor fabrication processes, it may be desirable to form a metal film…”
Claims 17, 19-20, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seo et al. (US 20040082167 A1) in view of and Mallick et al. (US 20180323068 A1) and Chandrashekar et al. (US 20130171822, IDS) and Wang et al. (US 20220068709 A1).
Re Claim 17 Seo teaches a method of forming a logic device (FIG. 2F), the method comprising:
providing a substrate (21, 23, and 227, [0022-0023], use dielectric 27 as part of substrate 21 as applied in FIG. 2G of enclosed invention) having a feature (trench in FIG. 2C) with a metal layer thereon (31) [0024], the feature extending a depth from a top surface (27) to a bottom surface (31 extends to bottom of 27 with respect to cross sectional area where 31 is located, FIG. 2C), the feature (trench) bounded by two sidewalls, the metal layer (31) being formed on at least the two sidewalls and the bottom surface of the feature (FIG. 2C);
exposing the metal layer (31) to ions ([0025] last sentence) to treat a portion of the metal layer (31b exposed to plasma), on the sidewalls near the top surface,
depositing a metal film on an untreated portion (31a) of the metal layer (31) on at least the bottom surface
Seo does not explicitly teach a hydrogen gas (H2) provided at a flow rate of at least 300 sccm and a partial pressure of at least 100 mTorr;
Seo does teach hydrogen gas is provided at 1500 sccm and a pressure of 5 Torr [0034].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching as taught by Seo into the structure of Seo.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Seo in the above manner for the motivation of finding optimal hydrogen gas flow rate and pressure.
Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In the instant case, process optimization will allow one of ordinary skill in the art to reach ideal hydrogen gas flow rate and pressure.
Seo does not teach a hydrogen conductively coupled plasma (CCP).
Mallick teaches the hydrogen plasma [0027] is a conductively coupled plasma (CCP) ([0025] last sentence).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching as taught by Mallick into the structure of Seo since Mallick integrates plasma into a semiconductor building process.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Mallick in combination with Seo in the above manner for the motivation of optimizing the hydrogen plasma process to allow for chip designs that are as small as possible. [0004] states, “There is a need in the art for new methods for chip designs with smaller critical dimensions.”
Seo in view of Mallick does not teach a tungsten film; and
a thickness in a range of about 30 A to about 50 A of the tungsten film forms on the untreated portion of the tungsten layer before the tungsten film forms on the treated portion.
Chandrashekar teaches forming a tungsten film (653) [0054] on the second portion (bottom half of trench, see image below) of the metal nucleation layer (113, [0018] states, “The under-layer 113 can be for example, a diffusion barrier layer, an adhesion layer, a nucleation layer…” [0054] states, “…113, which can be, for example, a metal nitride or other barrier layer.” Metal is a known barrier layer material) before the metal film forms on the treated portion ([0054] states, “Deposition continues, in some embodiments with one or more selective inhibition cycles, until the feature is filled.” Implying the top surface is covered in with 653 material after the bottom of the trench). Using FIG. 6 fragment below Claim 1 shows the layer 653 is about half way up the trench sidewalls which is comparable to the enclosed invention).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching as taught by Chandrashekar into the structure of Seo in view of Mallick since Chandrashekar uses a deposition process to integrate a metal film into a semiconductor device
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Chandrashekar in combination with Seo in view of Mallick in the above manner for the motivation of depositing the optimal amount of the metal film layer. [0002] states, “Deposition of tungsten-containing materials using chemical vapor deposition (CVD) techniques is an integral part of many semiconductor fabrication processes.”
Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In the instant case, process optimization will allow one of ordinary skill in the art to reach optimal metal film thickness at the bottom of the trench.
Seo in view of Mallick since Chandrashekar does not teach forming a tungsten film on a tungsten layer.
Wang teaches forming a tungsten film (108) [0018] on a tungsten layer (106, FIG. 2)
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching as taught by Wang into the structure of Seo in view of Mallick and Chandrashekar since Wang integrates tungsten as the material for a metal layer into a semiconductor building process.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Wang in combination with Seo in view of Mallick and Chandrashekar in the above manner for the motivation of using a tungsten material for the nucleation layer as it desirable in the art of semiconductor processing. [0002] states, “Selectively depositing a film on one surface relative to a different surface is useful for patterning and other applications.”
Re Claim 19 Seo in view of Mallick and Chandrashekar and Wang teaches the method of claim 17, but does not explicitly teach the tungsten layer has an overhang of less than or equal to about 50 A.
Seo in view of Mallick and Chandrashekar and Wang does teach (Chandrashekar, [0017]), “In some embodiments, the feature hole 105 may have an aspect ratio of at least about 2:1, at least about 4:1, at least about 6:1 or higher. The feature hole 105 may also have a dimension near the opening, e.g., an opening diameter or line width, of between about 10 nm to 500 nm…” Set the width to form the overhang region (top, center, FIG. 1B)is than or equal to 50A (50A = 5 nm).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching as taught by Chandrashekar into the structure of Seo in view of Mallick and Chandrashekar and Wang.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Chandrashekar in the above manner for the motivation of finding optimal tungsten layer overhang distance.
Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In the instant case, process optimization will allow one of ordinary skill in the art to reach ideal tungsten layer overhang dimensions.
Re Claim 20 Seo in view of Mallick and Chandrashekar and Wang teaches the method of claim 17, wherein the tungsten film (Wang, 108) fills the feature (trench) with substantially no seam or void (FIG. 2).
Re Claim 22 Seo in view of Mallick and Chandrashekar and Wang teaches the method of claim 17, but does not explicitly teach the tungsten film forms on the untreated portion of the tungsten layer for a time of less than 10 seconds before the tungsten film forms on the treated portion of the tungsten layer.
Seo in view of Mallick and Chandrashekar and Wang teaches (Chandrashekar [0050]), “Example exposure times can range from about 10 s to 500 s, depending on desired selectivity and feature depth.” Therefore, the exposure time can potentially be under 10 seconds indicating the second portion of the tungsten film (653, FIG. 6 top right) can be formed less than 10s after forming the first portion of the tungsten film (FIG. 6 bottom left).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching as taught by Chandrashekar into the structure of Seo in view of Mallick and Chandrashekar and Wang.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Chandrashekar in the above manner for the motivation of finding optimal delay times between material deposition
Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In the instant case, process optimization will allow one of ordinary skill in the art to reach ideal time to wait between forming portions of a layer.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-2, 6-8, 10-11, 13-15, 17, and 19-25 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
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 KENNETH MARK SIPLING whose telephone number is (571)272-3269. The examiner can normally be reached 10 AM - 6 PM 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, Eva Montalvo can be reached at (571) 270-3829. 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.
/KENNETH MARK SIPLING/Examiner, Art Unit 2818
/DUY T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818 2/25/26