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 .
This is a Non-Final office action based on application 18/209,719 in response to reply filed June 24, 2026. Claims 1, 3-20 are currently pending and have been considered below.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 June 24, 2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Durand (Pre-Grant Publication 2021/0050212).
Regarding claim 1, Durand discloses forming a low-k dielectric film comprising:
providing a treatment precursor such as one or more of diatomic nitrogen (N2), diatomic oxygen (O2), ammonia (NH3), argon (Ar), helium (He), or diatomic hydrogen (H2) (Paragraph [0063]) & Claim 4) to a processing region of a semiconductor processing chamber (Fig. 1, Claim 1), wherein a substrate is housed within the processing region, and wherein the substrate comprises a layer of a silicon-containing material (Paragraph [0015]);
forming inductively-coupled plasma effluents of the treatment precursor (Paragraph [0037]); and
contacting the layer of the silicon-containing material with the inductively- coupled plasma effluents of the treatment precursor to produce a treated layer of the silicon-containing material, wherein the contacting reduces a dielectric constant of the layer of the silicon-containing material (Claim 1 & Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 3, Durand further discloses:
the silicon- containing material comprises a silicon-and-oxygen-containing material, a silicon-carbon-and- oxygen-containing material, or a silicon-carbon-oxygen-and-hydrogen-containing material (Claim 5).
Regarding claim 4, Durand further discloses:
the inductively-coupled plasma effluents of the treatment precursor are formed at a plasma power of greater than or about 2,000 W (Claim 8 & 9).
Regarding claim 5, Durand further discloses:
the treated layer of the silicon-containing material is characterized by a dielectric constant of less than or about 2.9 (Claim 2).
Regarding claim 8, Durand further discloses:
a pressure within the processing region is maintained at less than or about 50 Torr (Claim 1).
Regarding claim 9, Durand further discloses:
a temperature within the processing region is maintained at greater than or about 150 °C (Claim 1)
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, 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.
Claims 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Durand (Pre-Grant Publication 2021/0050212) in view of Xie (Pre-Grant Publication 2022/0084815).
Regarding claim 6, Durand disclose all of the limitations of claim 11 (addressed above). Durand does not disclose the contacting increases Si-C-Si crosslinking in the layer of the silicon-containing material, and wherein the treated layer of the silicon-containing material is characterized by Si-C-Si crosslinking of greater than or about 0.4% or exposing the treated layer of the silicon-containing material to ultraviolet light to produce a cured layer of the silicon-containing material, wherein the exposing reduces a methyl concentration in the layer of the treated layer of the silicon-containing material, and wherein the cured layer of the silicon-containing material is characterized by a methyl concentration of less than or about 4.5%. However Xie discloses depositing a low-k dielectric comprising:
Depositing a film by flowing precursor on to a substrate in a processing chamber by generating a plasma wherein the film can have a reduced methyl concentration of less than or about 4.5% (Paragraph [0049]) & the film can have a Si-C-Si crosslinking of greater than 0.24% or more (Paragraph [0050]).
It would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to form the deposited layer having a reduced methyl concentration of less than or about 4.5% & having a Si-C-Si crosslinking of greater than 0.24% or more because it will serve to decrease the dielectric constant and increase the mechanical stability of the low-k film to a desired level (Paragraph [0049 & 0050]).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Durand (Pre-Grant Publication 2021/0050212) in view of Wu (Pre-Grant Publication 2010/0151206).
Regarding claim 7, Durand disclose all of the limitations of claim 1 (addressed above). Durand does not disclose contacting the layer of the silicon-containing material with the inductively-coupled plasma effluents of the treatment precursor reduces a carbon content in the layer of the silicon-containing material. However Wu discloses remove carbon from an organosilicate material comprising:
Forming an organosilicate film from a precursor using inductively coupled plasma that comprises carbon species (Paragraph [0023] & Claim 1) and treating the organosilicate to remove at least a portion of the carbon content (abstract & Claim 1).
It would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to remove/reduce carbon content in the film because it will improve an mechanical properties in the film such as dielectric constant, mechanical strength, etc (Paragraph [0002]).
Claim(s) 10-13, & 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Durand (Pre-Grant Publication 2021/0050212) in view of Munro (Pre-Grant Publication 2008/0026597).
Regarding claim 10, Durand disclose all of the limitations of claim 1 (addressed above). Durand does not disclose exposing the treated layer of the silicon-containing material to ultraviolet light to produce a cured layer of the silicon-containing material. However Munro discloses deposited a low-k film comprising:
Forming a silicon oxide layer on a substrate using an silicon and oxygen precursor wherein an first anneal step comprising exposing the oxide layer to ultraviolet light to cured the layer (Fig. 1, Paragraph [0031]).
It would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to expose the treated layer to ultraviolet light to cure the layer because it will serve to increase the hardness of the film (Paragraph [0031]).
Regarding claim 11, Durand discloses forming a low-k dielectric film comprising:
providing a treatment precursor to a processing region of a semiconductor processing chamber (Fig. 1, Claim 1), wherein a substrate is housed within the processing region, and wherein the substrate comprises a layer of a silicon-containing material (Paragraph [0015]);
forming inductively-coupled plasma effluents of the treatment precursor at a plasma power of greater than or about 3,000 W (Paragraph [0037]) & Claim 8/9); and
contacting the layer of the silicon-containing material with the inductively- coupled plasma effluents of the treatment precursor to produce a treated layer of the silicon- containing material, wherein the contacting increases/improves one or more mechanical properties of the layer of the silicon-containing material (Claim 1 & Paragraph [0042]).
Durand does not explicitly disclose forming the plasma at a plasma power of greater than or about 3,500 W. However Munro disclose a method for depositing low-k films comprising:
Forming a dielectric layer wherein the deposition process includes supplying precursors within a plasma chamber at a plasma power of greater than or about 3500 (Paragraph [0033-0037]).
It would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to form the dielectric layer at a plasma power of about or greater than 3500 W because it will form a highly conformal layer having good insulating properties and good film quality with low moisture (Paragraph [0002 & 0037]).
Regarding claim 12, Durand further discloses:
the silicon- containing material comprises a silicon-and-oxygen-containing material, a silicon-carbon-and- oxygen-containing material, or a silicon-carbon-oxygen-and-hydrogen-containing material (Claim 5).
Regarding claim 13, Durand further discloses:
the one or more mechanical properties comprise hardness, Young's modulus, dielectric constant, or porosity (Paragraph [0042]).
Regarding claim 16, Durand further discloses:
the cured layer of the silicon-containing material is characterized by a dielectric constant of less than or about 2.85 (Claim 2).
Regarding claim 17, Durand further discloses:
the cured layer of the silicon-containing material is characterized by a hardness of greater than or about 3 GPa (Paragraph [0042]).
Regarding claim 18- 20, Durand discloses forming a low-k dielectric film comprising:
providing a treatment precursor such as helium to a processing region of a semiconductor processing chamber (Fig. 1, Claim 1 & Claim 4), wherein a substrate is housed within the processing region, and wherein the substrate comprises a layer of a silicon-containing material (Paragraph [0015]);
forming inductively-coupled plasma effluents of the treatment precursor (Paragraph [0037]); and
contacting the layer of the silicon-containing material with the inductively- coupled plasma effluents of the treatment precursor to produce a treated layer of the silicon-containing material (Claim 1 & Fig. 1).
Forming the layer having a hardness of greater than or about 2 GPa (Paragraph [0042]).
Durand does not disclose exposing the treated layer of the silicon-containing material to ultraviolet light to produce a cured layer of the silicon-containing material. However Munro discloses deposited a low-k film comprising:
Forming a silicon oxide layer on a substrate using an silicon and oxygen precursor wherein an first anneal step comprising exposing the oxide layer to ultraviolet light to cured the layer and increase the hardness of the layer (Fig. 1, Paragraph [0031]).
It would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to expose the treated layer to ultraviolet light to cure the layer because it will serve to increase the hardness of the film and remove a portion of moisture (Paragraph [0031]).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Durand (Pre-Grant Publication 2021/0050212) in view of Munro (Pre-Grant Publication 2008/0026597) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Manna (Pre-Grant Publication 2015/0196933).
Regarding claim 14, Durand and Munro disclose all of the limitations of claim 11 (addressed above). Neither reference disclose the treated layer of the silicon-containing material is characterized by a second thickness less than a first thickness of the layer of the silicon-containing material. However Manna discloses forming a low-k dielectric comprising:
Forming a silicon-containing layer from a deposition precursor within a processing chamber and curing the film wherein the film can be deposited to a desired thickness (Claims 9 & 13), such that the thickness of the treated layer can be less than a thickness of the substrate.
It would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to form the film from process above because it will form a film having improved mechanical properties such as hardness and dielectric constant at a desired thickness (Paragraph [0003]).
Claims 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Durand (Pre-Grant Publication 2021/0050212) in view of Munro (Pre-Grant Publication 2008/0026597) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Xie (Pre-Grant Publication 2022/0084815).
Regarding claim 15, Durand and Munro disclose all of the limitations of claim 11 (addressed above). Neither reference disclose the contacting increases Si-C-Si crosslinking in the layer of the silicon-containing material, and wherein the treated layer of the silicon-containing material is characterized by Si-C-Si crosslinking of greater than or about 0.4% or exposing the treated layer of the silicon-containing material to ultraviolet light to produce a cured layer of the silicon-containing material, wherein the exposing reduces a methyl concentration in the layer of the treated layer of the silicon-containing material, and wherein the cured layer of the silicon-containing material is characterized by a methyl concentration of less than or about 4.5%. However Xie discloses depositing a low-k dielectric comprising:
Depositing a film by flowing precursor on to a substrate in a processing chamber by generating a plasma wherein the film can have a reduced methyl concentration of less than or about 4.5% (Paragraph [0049]) & the film can have a Si-C-Si crosslinking of greater than 0.24% or more (Paragraph [0050]).
It would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to form the deposited layer having a reduced methyl concentration of less than or about 4.5% & having a Si-C-Si crosslinking of greater than 0.24% or more because it will serve to decrease the dielectric constant and increase the mechanical stability of the low-k film to a desired level (Paragraph [0049 & 0050]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argument regarding claim 1 of Durand not teaching a post-deposition treatment to modify an existing layer is not considered persuasive because as stated in the Final rejection the substrate itself qualifies as an existing layer who surface is modified to form a dielectric as disclosed by the processing steps of Durand. Further Durand discloses any of the film processing steps can be performed on an underlayer formed on the substrate (Paragraph 0015]) therefore the underlayer can be an existing layer that is modified by processing step of Durand in a post-treatment process. Further none of the current claims have any limitations requiring the claimed processing method to be performed as a post-deposition treatment or preclude the processing method from being a pre-deposition process.
Further regarding claim 18 applicant argument of one skilled in the art would not modify Durand with the process of Munro because Durand disclose depositing high hardness dielectric films is not considered persuasive because the UV light exposure step also has other benefits beyond increasing the hardness such as remove unwanted portions of moisture for the treated layer (Paragraph [0031]), therefore one skilled in the art would still be motivated to combine the teachings of Durand and Munro for all of the advantages of the UV treatment.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON C FOX whose telephone number is (571)270-5016. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-6:00PM.
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, Jeff W Natalini can be reached at 571-272-2266. 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.
/BRANDON C FOX/Examiner, Art Unit 2818
/DAVID VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Prosecution Insights