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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims as amended 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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 11-13, 17, 22 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Publication 2022/0051902 to Tanaka et al.
Regarding Claim 1, Tanaka et al. teaches an etching method in a chamber (1) of a plasma processing apparatus (Fig 5), the method comprising: (a) providing, in the chamber, a substrate including an etching target film (21) and a mask (20) on the etching target film, the mask comprising at least one selected from the group consisting of Ru, Mo and InGaZnO (Paragraph 30); and (b) etching the etching target film using plasma generated from a process gas including a hydrogen fluoride gas (Paragraph 29).
Regarding Claim 11, Tanaka et al. teaches (Paragraph 31) (b) includes
setting a temperature of a substrate support supporting the substrate to 0 °C or lower.
Regarding Claim 12, Tanaka et al. teaches (Paragraph 27) the etching target film includes at least one selected from the group consisting of a silicon oxide film, a silicon nitride film, a polysilicon film, and a film stack including at least two of the silicon oxide film, the silicon nitride film, or the polysilicon film.
Regarding Claim 13, Tanaka et al. teaches (Paragraph 27) the etching target
film is a silicon-containing film, a carbon-containing film, or a metal oxide film.
Regarding Claim 17, Tanaka et al. teaches an etching method in a chamber (1) of a plasma processing apparatus (Fig. 5), the method comprising: providing, in the chamber, a substrate including an etching target film (SF) and a mask (MK) on the etching target film, the mask comprising at least one selected from the group consisting of Ru, Mo and InGaZnO (Paragraph 30) and etching the etching target film using plasma including a hydrogen fluoride species (Paragraph 29) wherein the species is generated from at least one of a hydrogen fluoride gas, a hydrofluorocarbon gas, or a hydrofluorocarbon gas having at least two carbon atoms (Paragraph 29).
Regarding Claims 22 and 23, Tanaka et al. teaches the mask comprises Ru.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Publication 2022/0051902 to Tanaka et al. in view of US Publication 2023/0395391 to Wang et al.
Regarding Claim 4, Tanaka et al. teaches the method of the invention
substantially as claimed, but does not expressly teach the etch mask further comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of silicon carbon and nitrogen. However, Wang et al. teaches an etch mask comprising Ru may further comprise carbon for improved mask selectivity (Paragraph 21) when etching a substrate including alternating oxide and nitride materials (Paragraph 38). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to provide Ru carbide in the method of Tanaka et al. as a suitable Ru based etch mask for patterning alternating oxide and nitride materials with predictable results.
Claims 5-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Publication 2022/0051902 to Tanaka et al. in view of US Publication 2021/0343539 to Suda et al.
Regarding Claims 5-7, Tanaka et al. teaches the method of the invention substantially as claimed, but does not expressly teach the process gas includes phosphorous gas comprising fluorine or chlorine. However, Suda et al. teaches (Paragraph 84) the process gas includes phosphorous gas comprising fluorine or chlorine. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to provide the process gas including phosphorous gas comprising fluorine or chlorine in the method of Tanaka et al. to protect the sidewall with predictable results.
Regarding Claim 8, Tanaka et al. teaches the method of the invention substantially as claimed, but does not expressly teach the process gas includes the
hydrogen fluoride gas with a highest flow rate of non-inert components of the process
gas. However, Suda et al. teaches (See at least Abstract and Claim 1) the process gas
includes the hydrogen fluoride gas with a highest flow rate of non-inert components of
the process gas. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time
of the claimed invention to provide the process gas including the hydrogen fluoride gas
with a highest flow rate of non-inert components of the process gas in the method of
Tanaka et al. with predictable results.
Regarding Claim 9, Tanaka et al. teaches the method of the invention
substantially as claimed, but does not expressly teach the process gas further includes
at least one gas selected from the group consisting of a tungsten-containing gas, a titanium-containing gas, and a molybdenum-containing gas. However, Suda et al. teaches (Paragraph 83) the process gas further includes at least one gas selected from the group consisting of a tungsten-containing gas (WF6), a titanium-containing gas, and a molybdenum-containing gas. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to provide the process gas further including at least one gas selected from the group consisting of a tungsten-containing gas, a titanium-containing gas, and a molybdenum-containing gas. in the
method of Tanaka et al. with predictable results.
Regarding Claim 10, Tanaka et al. teaches the method of the invention
substantially as claimed, but does not expressly teach the process gas further includes
an oxygen-containing gas. However, Suda et al. teaches (Paragraph 82) the process gas further includes an oxygen-containing gas. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to provide the process gas further including an oxygen-containing gas in the method of Tanaka et al. to control opening with predictable results.
Claims 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
over US Publication 2022/0051902 to Tanaka et al. in view of US Publication
2017/0330759 to Gohira et al.
Regarding Claim 14, Tanaka et al. teaches the method of the invention
substantially as claimed including a film stack including a silicon oxide film and a silicon nitride film (See at least Paragraph 27), but does not expressly teach etching the target film includes controlling a temperature of the substrate to be higher in etching the silicon nitride film than in etching the silicon oxide film. However, Gohira et al. teaches
(Paragraph 121) the temperature may be higher for silicon nitride etching and lower for
silicon oxide etching. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to provide the temperature higher for silicon nitride etching and lower for silicon oxide etching in the method of Yokoyama et al. in order to control etch rate with predictable results.
Regarding Claim 15, Gohira et al. teaches (Paragraphs 47, 109 and 121) the
temperature may be controlled by the temperature of the coolant (heat-transfer fluid).
Regarding Claim 16, Tanaka et al. teaches (Paragraph 31) a pressure
of the heat transfer gas may be used to control the substrate temperature. It would have
been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to
control substrate temperature using a pressure of the heat transfer gas in the method of Tanaka et al. in view of Gohira et al. with predictable results.
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 Roberts P Culbert whose telephone number is (571)272-1433. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday 7:30 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, 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.
/ROBERTS P CULBERT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716