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 .
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 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.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office Action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 January 29, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendments/Arguments
Amendments made to claims 21 and 36, as well as the cancelation of claims 1-20 and 39, as filed on January 29, 2025, are acknowledged.
Applicant's arguments, see Remarks filed on January 29, 2025, with respect to claim 21 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues that “Kim '745 does not appear to teach or suggest the claimed alkyl amine corrosion inhibitor of the claims”; however, ‘745 teaches that in a silicon nitride etching composition (paragraph 0107), an alkyl amine such as dibutylamine or triethylamine can be used in the composition as a corrosion inhibitor to prevent corrosion of metals used as semiconductor device materials during the etching process (paragraphs 109 and 110), which has been confirmed by both a machine-translated English version of ‘745 (which was attached to the Office Action mailed on February 1, 2024) and a translation using Google Translate app through Google Lens: “Examples of the amine compounds include p-phenylenediamine, polyaniline, aniline, N-phenyl-p-phenylenediamine, tyramine, triamine hydrochloride, hexamethylenetetramine, urea, dibutylamine, piperazine, 1-(2-hydroxyethyl)piperazine, 2-methylpiperazine, triethylamine, 2-dimethylaminoethanol, etc.”.
The Applicant further argues that “There is no establishment of equivalence between any particular species and alkyl amine or phosphate salts thereof as suitable corrosion inhibitors”. However, ‘110 discloses that the composition may include a corrosion inhibitor as an additive (paragraph 0111) and the substrate to be etched may include metal (paragraph 0139). In addition, ‘745 teaches that in a silicon nitride etching composition (paragraph 0107), an alkyl amine such as dibutylamine or triethylamine can be used in the composition as a corrosion inhibitor to prevent corrosion of metals used as semiconductor device materials during the etching process (paragraphs 109 and 110). Therefore, ‘745 demonstrates that an alkylamine is an equivalent of a corrosion inhibitor in a silicon nitride etching composition of ‘110.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 of this title, 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 21-23, 25-38 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US20190390110, hereinafter ‘110) in view of Kim et al. (KR20180109745, a machine-translated English version is used, hereinafter ‘745).
Regarding claim 21, ‘110 discloses a method for removing silicon nitride from a microelectronic device (paragraph 0142), the method comprising contacting the microelectronic device with a composition, for sufficient time under sufficient conditions to at least partially remove the silicon nitride material from the microelectronic device with a selectivity of silicon nitride to silicon oxide of at least 1000:1 (claims 14 and paragraph 0119), wherein the composition comprises: (a) phosphoric acid (claim 1 and paragraph 0068); (b) alkylamino alkoxysilanes, wherein said silane possesses alkoxy and said silane possess at least one -NH2 moiety (claim 1 and paragraph 0084); (c) a solvent comprising water (claim 1 and paragraph 0068); and (d) a fluoride compound (hydrogen fluoride, paragraph 0105 and claim 10). ‘110 is silent about the composition comprises (e) an alkyl amine or phosphate salt thereof. However, ‘110 discloses that the composition may include a corrosion inhibitor as an additive (paragraph 0111) and the substrate to be etched may include metal (paragraph 0139). In addition, ‘745 teaches that in a silicon nitride etching composition (paragraph 0107), an alkyl amine such as dibutylamine or triethylamine can be used in the composition as a corrosion inhibitor to prevent corrosion of metals used as semiconductor device materials during the etching process (paragraphs 109 and 110). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use an alkyl amine which is a known corrosion inhibitor as taught by ‘745 in the composition of ‘110, with a reasonable expectation of success. It has been held that substituting equivalents known for the same purpose is obvious. See MPEP 2144.06 II. In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of ‘110 (a corrosion inhibitor as an additive) and ‘745 (an alkylamine such as use dibutylamine or triethylamine is a known corrosion additive) according to known method to yield predictable results (adding a corrosion inhibitor in a silicon nitride etching solution to prevent corrosion of metals used as semiconductor device materials during the etching process, ‘745: paragraphs 107, 109 and 110). It has been held that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is obvious. See MPEP 2143 I.(A).
Regarding claim 22, ‘110 discloses wherein the phosphoric acid is present in a range of 75 to 90 weight percent, based on the total weight of the composition (paragraph 0097).
Regarding claim 23, ‘110 discloses wherein the fluoride compound is HF (hydrogen fluoride, paragraph 0105).
Regarding claim 25, ‘110 discloses wherein the fluoride compound is ammonium fluoride (paragraph 0105).
Regarding claim 26, ‘110 discloses wherein the alkylamino alkoxysilane is represented by the formula as recited in the instant claim, wherein each X is independently a group of the formula -OR, wherein R is a C1 alkyl group, n is an integer of 3, and each R1 is independently a C1 alkyl group [(N,Ndimethyl-3-aminopropy l)trimethoxysilane, paragraph 0084].
Regarding claim 27, ‘110 discloses wherein R is methyl [(N,Ndimethyl-3-aminopropy l)trimethoxysilane, paragraph 0084].
Regarding claim 28, ‘110 discloses wherein the alkylamino alkoxysilane is [(3-aminopropyl) silanetriol, paragraph 0084).
Regarding claim 29, ‘745 discloses wherein the alkyl amine is a secondary C4 alkylamine (dibutylamine, paragraph 0110).
Regarding claim 30, ‘110 discloses wherein the alkylamino alkoxysilane is represented by the formula as recited in the instant claim [(3-trimethoxysilylpropyl)dethylenetriamine, paragraph 0084].
Regarding claim 31, ‘110 discloses wherein R is methyl [(3-trimethoxysilylpropyl)dethylenetriamine, paragraph 0084].
Regarding claim 32, ‘110 discloses wherein the alkylamino alkoxysilane is (3-trimethoxysilylpropyl)dethylenetriamine (paragraph 0084).
Regarding claim 33, ‘745 discloses wherein the alkyl amine is a secondary C4 alkylamine (dibutylamine, paragraph 0110).
Regarding claim 34, ‘110 discloses a surfactant (paragraph 0111).
Regarding claim 35, ‘110 discloses wherein the alkylamino alkoxysilane is represented by the 2nd formula as recited in the instant claim (Chemical Formula 1 in claim 1, wherein R1, R2, R3 are C1 alkoxy, R’ is substituted amino(C4)alkyl, with -CH2- of the alkyl substituted by amino(C2)alkyl, claim 1).
Regarding claim 36, ‘110 discloses a method a method of selectively removing silicon nitride material (paragraph 0142) comprising: contacting a substrate supporting silicon nitride with an etchant having a selectivity of silicon nitride to silicon oxide of at least 1000:1 (claims 14 and paragraph 0119), the etchant comprising: (a) phosphoric acid (claim 1 and paragraph 0068); (b) alkylamino alkoxysilanes, wherein said silane possesses alkoxy and said silane possess at least one -NH2 moiety (claim 1 and paragraph 0084); (c) a solvent comprising water (claim 1 and paragraph 0068); and (d) a fluoride compound (hydrogen fluoride, paragraph 0105 and claim 10). ‘110 is silent about the composition comprises (e) an alkyl amine or phosphate salt thereof. However, ‘110 discloses that the composition may include a corrosion inhibitor as an additive (paragraph 0111) and the substrate to be etched may include metal (paragraph 0139). In addition, ‘745 teaches that in a silicon nitride etching composition (paragraph 0107), an alkyl amine such as dibutylamine or triethylamine can be used in the composition as a corrosion inhibitor to prevent corrosion of metals used as semiconductor device materials during the etching process (paragraphs 109 and 110). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use an alkyl amine which is a known corrosion inhibitor as taught by ‘745 in the composition of ‘110, with a reasonable expectation of success. It has been held that substituting equivalents known for the same purpose is obvious. See MPEP 2144.06 II. In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of ‘110 (using a corrosion inhibitor as an additive) and ‘745 (an alkylamine such as use dibutylamine or triethylamine is a known corrosion additive) according to known method to yield predictable results (adding a corrosion inhibitor in a silicon nitride etching solution to prevent corrosion of metals used as semiconductor device materials during the etching process, ‘745: paragraphs 107, 109 and 110). It has been held that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is obvious. See MPEP 2143 I.(A).
Regarding claim 37, ‘110 discloses wherein the etchant has a temperature of 100° C (paragraph 0137).
Regarding claim 38, ‘110 is silent about wherein contacting the substrate with the etchant occurs from about 1 to about 3 minutes. However, ‘110 teaches that in measuring etch rate, the thickness etched is divided by the etching time in minute (paragraph 0149). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to chosen an etch time through dividing the thickness to be etched by the etch rate, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 40, Lee discloses wherein etchant comprises 75 wt. % to 90 wt. % of phosphoric acid by weight of the etchant (paragraph 0097).
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US20190390110, hereinafter ‘110) in view of Kim et al. (KR20180109745, a machine-translated English version is used, hereinafter ‘745) as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Ishizaki et al. (US20180237923).
Regarding claim 24, ‘110 in view of ‘745 is silent about wherein the fluoride compound is chosen from cesium fluoride and potassium fluoride. However, ‘110 discloses that the composition is an etching composition comprises a fluoride-based compound such as hydrogen fluoride and ammonium fluoride (paragraph 0105). In addition, Ishizaki discloses that examples of fluoride ion source in an etching composition include hydrogen fluoride, ammonium fluoride and potassium fluoride (paragraph 0020). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use potassium fluoride as taught by Ishizaki as a fluoride-based compound in the composition of ‘110, with a reasonable expectation of success. It has been held that substituting equivalents known for the same purpose is obvious. See MPEP 2144.06 II.
Conclusion
All claims are identical to, patentably indistinct from, or have unity of invention with the claims in the application prior to the entry of the submission under 37 CFR 1.114 (that is, restriction (including a lack of unity of invention) would not be proper) and all claims could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the application prior to entry under 37 CFR 1.114. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action after the filing of a request for continued examination and the submission under 37 CFR 1.114. See MPEP § 706.07(b). 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIONG-PING LU whose telephone number is (571) 270-1135. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 9:00am – 5:00pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joshua L Allen, can be reached at telephone number (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 an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/JIONG-PING LU/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713
Prosecution Insights