DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
As of the amendment filed 12/29/25, claims 21-23 have been added, claims 5, 6, and 9 have been canceled, and claims 1, 7, 10, and 14 have been amended. Therefore, claims 1-4, 7, 8, and 10-23 remain pending, with claims 1, 7, and 14 being independent.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 12/29/25, with respect to claims 1, 7, and their dependent claims, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous rejection of those claims has been withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 14 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.
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(s) 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over More (US 2022/0216102) in view of Liao (US 2021/0327945).
As to claim 14, More teaches a method for manufacturing a semiconductor structure (figs. 2D-2G), comprising:
forming an aluminum-containing layer (216, [0068], fig. 2D);
forming an etch stop layer (218/220) over the aluminum-containing layer (216, [0068], fig. 2D);
forming a carbon-containing dielectric layer (222) over the etch stop layer (218/220, [0069], fig. 2D, low-k dielectric layer. Although carbon-containing not explicitly taught, adding carbon to a dielectric layer such as silicon oxide is known in the art to reduce the dielectric constant (see [0030] of Liao). Its use is obvious so as to use an industrially tested and accepted method of fabricating a low-k dielectric);
forming a via opening (224A) and a line trench (224B) in the carbon-containing dielectric layer (222, [0070] – [0071], fig. 2E), wherein the via opening (224A) passes through the etch stop layer (218/220) and partially extends into of the aluminum-containing layer (216), so that a bottom surface of the via opening (224A) is lower than a top surface of the aluminum-containing layer (216) while is higher than a bottom surface of the aluminum-containing layer (fig. 2E, [0071]);
etching through the aluminum-containing layer (216) so that the via opening (224A) extends through the aluminum-containing layer (fig. 2F, [0073]); and
forming a conductive structure (226/227/228) in the via opening (224A) and the line trench (224B, fig. 2G, [0074]).
Claim(s) 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over More in view of Liao, as applied to claim 14, and in further view of Lee (US 2021/0257293) and Lavoie (US 2008/0241575).
As to claim 15, More further teaches forming the conductive structure in the via opening and the line trench (Fig. 2G) comprises:
forming a first barrier layer (226) over sidewalls of the via opening (224A) and the line trench (224B, [0074]);
forming a second barrier layer (227) over the first barrier layer (226, [0074]);
forming a conductive layer (228) over the second barrier layer (226, [0074]); and
polishing the first barrier layer, the second barrier layer, and the conductive layer to form the conductive structure ([0074], the three layers are all flush, and using a polishing method to make them flush is very well-known in the art).
More does not teach the exact method of forming the barrier layers. However, Lee teaches forming a first barrier layer (234a) over sidewalls of the via opening and the line trench (22) by performing an atomic layer deposition process ([0025]); forming a second barrier layer (234b) over the first barrier layer (234a) by performing a physical vapor deposition process ([0025]); forming a conductive layer (236) over the second barrier layer ([0025]) and polishing the first barrier layer, the second barrier layer, and the conductive layer to form the conductive structure (fig. 2C).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to form barrier layers using well-known methods, as taught by Lee, so as to protect against copper diffusion.
Neither More or Lee teach the conductive layer is doped with dopants. However, Lavoie teaches doping copper interconnects with aluminum for the purposes of reducing electromigration and improving circuit reliability ([0007]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to dope the line, via, and barrier layer with aluminum for the reasons stated above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-4, 7, 8, 10-13, and 17-23 are allowed and claim 16 is 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.. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: see Applicant’s arguments dated 12/29/25 for reasons for allowance.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any response to this Office Action should be faxed to (571) 273-8300 or mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Hand-Delivered responses should be brought to:
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22313
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAREN M KUSUMAKAR whose telephone number is (571)270-3520. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday from 7:30a – 4:30p EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Fernando Toledo can be reached on 571-272-1867. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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.
/KAREN KUSUMAKAR/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
1/28/26