Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/209,719

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IMPROVING MECHANICAL STRENGTH OF LOW DIELECTRIC CONSTANT MATERIALS

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Jun 14, 2023
Examiner
FOX, BRANDON C
Art Unit
2818
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Applied Materials, Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
686 granted / 800 resolved
+17.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
824
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
56.9%
+16.9% vs TC avg
§102
33.9%
-6.1% vs TC avg
§112
5.9%
-34.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 800 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 Final office action based on application 18/209,719 in response to reply filed November 25, 2025. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been considered below. 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) 1-5, 8-9, 11-13, 16-17 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 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 2, Durand further discloses: the treatment precursor comprises one or more of diatomic nitrogen (N2), diatomic oxygen (02), ammonia (NH3), argon (Ar), helium (He), or diatomic hydrogen (H2) (Claim 4) 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) 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 2,000 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]). 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]). 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. 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 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]). 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 Manna (Pre-Grant Publication 2015/0196933). Regarding claim 14, Durand disclose all of the limitations of claim 11 (addressed above). Durand does not 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 6 & 15 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 & 15, 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) 18-20 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 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 (Paragraph [0031]). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed November 25, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argument of the applied prior art Durand not relating to any post-deposition treatment is not considered persuasive because the silicon-containing substrate of Durand alone meets the claimed limitations of “wherein the substrate comprises a layer of a silicon-containing material” wherein the substrate undergoes post-treatment after being placed within a processing region. Further Durand discloses the substrate may also have an underlayer formed on the substrate wherein a film/layer has been deposited on the substrate (Paragraph [0015]). Therefore the substrate or the underlayer formed on the substrate would undergo post-deposition/post-formation treatment using an inductively coupled plasma process using a precursor (Paragraph [0037]) to form a low-k dielectric film. 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 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 14, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Nov 25, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 16, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598785
Semiconductor Devices and Methods of Manufacturing
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593476
FIN FIELD-EFFECT TRANSISTOR DEVICE WITH HYBRID CONDUCTION MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588213
SEMICONDUCTOR MEMORY STRUCTURE HAVING ENHANCED MEMORY WINDOW AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588291
SUBSTRATES INCLUDING MICRO-STRUCTURED THIN FILM CAPACITORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581635
INTEGRATED CIRCUIT DEVICE AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+10.0%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 800 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month