DETAILED ACTION
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
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I, claims 1-15, in the reply filed on April 2, 2026, is acknowledged. Claims 16-20, are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 April 2, 2026. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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) 1-15, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U. S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0004105 (hereinafter referred to as Dai).
Dai, in [0014], [0016], and [0018], discloses a process of subjecting a metal-oxo photoresist film to exposure and subjecting the metal-oxo-photoresist system that comprises exposed and unexposed regions (the claimed photopatterned metal oxo photoresist) to a post-bake anneal, and performing a dry develop process (thermal develop, claimed developing a photopatterned metal oxo photoresist), followed by a post-develop treatment (claimed post-treating, [0033][Wingdings font/0xE0] operation 126). Dai, in [0026]-[0032], discloses that the dry developing process includes at least two operations (claimed first and second sub-operation) wherein in the first operation (operation 124) of the dry developing, flowing the gases into the chamber and causing plasma by the reactive gases to react with the unexposed regions, continuing with the second operation (operation 125) to implement pulsed bias and increase etch selectivity between the exposed and unexposed regions of the photopatterned photoresist (metal oxo photoresist that has been subjected to selective EUV exposure) (claim 1). Dai, in [0018], discloses that the dry develop process can be a thermal process without plasma and the flowing in of the reactive gas (during operation 124) can generate volatile species by reacting with the unexposed regions and thus is performed for a duration till the removal, and Dai, in [0030], discloses that the developing process can further include implementing a pulse bias during operation 125 that includes a duration of at least 15 seconds to increase etch selectivity i.e., the duration of the first and second operation (124, and 125) is different, and operation 124 occurs when the unexposed region is fully intact and Dai, in [0031], discloses that the longer period is needed for more of the unexposed regions to be removed, i.e., in the initial dry develop operation of 124 the duration is longer than 15 seconds (15 seconds is the duration for the subsequent dry develop process operation 125) due to higher amount of unexposed regions to be removed and includes the claimed at least 60 seconds, while the duration of operation 125 of the subsequent dry develop process can be ~15 seconds (less than 60 seconds) (claims 2-3). Dai, in [0025]-[0026], discloses that the two operations of the dry developing process include different flow rate of gases and depends on the required etch rate i.e., increase of gas into the chamber occurs at the initial stage of dry develop (operation 124) and will cause an increase in pressure and the subsequent process (operation 125) when the etch rate is slowed for uniformity in etch i.e., less reactive gas are introduced, the pressure will decrease i.e., both the operations occur at different pressures (claimed first and second pressures), and Dai, in [0027], discloses that the pressure, during the dry develop processes, varies from 1mTorr to about 100mTorr (claims 4-5). Dai, in [0028], discloses that during the operations 124 and 125 (claimed first and second sub-operations) the temperatures vary (is different during each operation, claimed first and second temperature) and can range from 0°C to less than 500°C (claims 6-7). Dai, in [0026]-[0027], discloses that during the two operations of the dry develop process (124 and 125) that the flow rate of the reactive gas and inert gas that is introduced during the operations (dry develop) and the corresponding ratios of flow rate of the two gases can be varied for each operations, see the different ratios and range of ratios in [0027] of Dai, wherein the reactive gas includes HBr and the inert gas includes Ar (claims 8-9). Dai, in [0033], discloses that the dry develop operations 124 and 125 can be repeated and that a plurality of cycles of the operations can be repeated so as to clear the unexposed regions of the photoresist (claim 10). Dai, in [0033], discloses that the post-dry develop process includes plasma purge that is performed in the plasma chamber (same chamber as the dry develop) and that the process includes a plasma etching wherein the chamber is actively heated for the thermal control of the plasma process (see [0025]) i.e., pre-develop treatment (post exposure process, see [0016], post-bake anneal) and post-develop treatment can include the same process i.e., heating (claims 11-12). Dai, in [0033], discloses that the post-develop process (post treatment process) is a plasma process and is different from the post-bake anneal process ([0016], claimed pre-treatment process) that occurs prior to the development of the photoresist (claim 13). Dai, in [0026], discloses that the thermal dry development process includes the gaseous mixture of reactive gas and inert gas wherein the reactive gas includes halogenated gas (halogenation agent) such as HBr, HCl, Cl2, Br2, etc., and the inert gas includes Ar or He (claims 14-15).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daborah Chacko-Davis whose telephone number is (571) 272-1380. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:30AM-6:00PM EST Mon-Fri. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mark F. Huff can be reached on (571) 272-1385. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-272-8300. 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.
/DABORAH CHACKO-DAVIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737 May 26, 2026.
Prosecution Insights