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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 6-8 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on May 30, 2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed September 05, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Claim 1 now recites “wherein the ammonium ions do not comprise ammonia (NH3)”. Applicant argues that Ohhashi teaches ammonia is an essential component of the composition. This is not persuasive because, by definition, the ammonium ion is (NH4)+ which is a distinct entity from ammonia NH3. As a distinct entity it does not makes sense to say “ammonium ions do not comprise ammonia (NH3)”. The only manner in which ammonium ions could possibly be considered to comprise NH3 is to view the ammonium ion as a protonated ammonia molecule in which case all ammonium ions comprise ammonia which in contrary to the recitation.
The examiner believes applicant’s amendment is an attempt to claim the process by which the claimed composition is made. Specifically, an attempt to claim that the source of ammonium ions is not ammonia or ammonium hydroxide.
Applicant’s specification explains that the pH of the composition is adversely effected when the source of the claimed ammonium ion is NH3 or NH4OH. Applicant discloses salts, such as ammonium acetate, are preferred as a source of ammonium ions rather than NH3 or NH4OH. However, claim 1 is directed to a composition that comprises ammonium ions. Ohhashi is a composition that comprises ammonium ions. The method by which applicant prepares the claimed solution is not relevant to a claim directed to a composition unless the method materially effects the composition. The recitation of “wherein the ammonium ions do not comprise ammonia (NH3)” is viewed as indicating ammonia is not used as the source of the ammonium ions (i.e., the method of making the composition does not include supplying NH3 to the composition). Again, the claim requires a composition with ammonium ion, the source of the ammonium ion is not relevant to the composition as claimed. The pH problem applicant discloses with regard to the use of ammonia or ammonium hydroxide is addressed by claims positive recitation of pH which is a pH that is taught by Ohhashi.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by US Patent Application Publication 2020/0190672 as filed by Ohhashi et al. (hereinafter, Ohhashi).
Regarding claim 1, Ohhashi teaches ruthenium etching composition comprising orthoperiodic acid and ammonium ions and having a pH of 6-7 (see, for example, the abstract, [0067] and Example 1 in TABLE 2).
Regarding claim 2, Ohhashi teaches the composition my further comprise a hydroxide of a quaternary alkyl ammonium, such as TMAH (see, for example, [0031]-[0032]).
Regarding claim 3, Ohhashi teaches the composition exhibits a ruthenium metal film etching rate of over 200 Å/min (see Example 1 in TABLE 2 @ pH 6-7).
Regarding claim 4, as Ohhashi anticipates the claimed composition the composition of Ohhashi is expected to have the same properties as the claimed composition. Therefore, the stability of Ohhashi’s composition, as measured by a reduction in Ru etching rate over time, is expected to be the same as that of applicant’s claimed composition.
Regarding claim 5, Ohhashi teaches the ruthenium etchant composition contains periodic acid in an amount within the claimed range of 0.1 to 5% by weight (see, for example, [0018]). Ohhashi teaches the composition contains ammonia in an amount within the claimed range of 0.1 to 5% by weight (see, for example, [0020]). Ohhashi teaches the composition a residual amount of water, based on the total weight of the etchant composition (see, for example [0067]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2024/0279574 (Narita et al.) teaches a Ru etchant comprising periodic acid and quaternary ammonium compound and having a pH of 6.5 (see, for example, TABLE 1, Example 1).
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Allan W Olsen whose telephone number is (571)272-1441. The examiner can normally be reached variable; M-F 9-7.
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, Parviz Hassanzadeh can be reached at 571-272-1435. 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.
ALLAN W. OLSEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1716
/Allan W. Olsen/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights