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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
1. Claims 1-3, 5-13, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2018/0122632 to Vrtis et al. (“Vrtis”).
With regard to Claims 1-3, 5, 8-9, 12 and 18-20, Vrtis teaches a semiconductor processing method comprising providing one or more of the claimed silicon-containing precursors to a chamber in which a substrate resides, forming a plasma of the precursors, and curing with UV energy to form a layer of silicon-containing material featuring a dielectric constant of less than or about 3.0 or 2.8 and a hardness of greater than or about 3.5 or 4.5 GPa (see Abstract; ¶¶ [0024]-[0028], [0052], [0058], [0062]; Claims 4, 26).
Further regarding Claim 12, Vrtis teaches layer dielectric constant within the claimed range as-deposited (compare Vrtis Claim 2 reciting dielectric constant within the claimed range with Claim 4 reciting post-deposition treatment).
With regard to Claim 6, Vrtis teaches the claimed temperature (see ¶¶ [0020], [0035]).
With regard to Claim 7, Vrtis teaches the claimed pressure (see ¶ [0045]).
With regard to Claims 10-11, Vrtis teaches curing via UV using the claimed conditions (see ¶¶ [0052], [00585]; Claim 4).
With regard to Claim 13, Vrtis teaches providing O2 (see ¶ [0036]).
With regard to Claim 17, Vrtis teaches the films features a Young’s modulus within the claimed range (see Claims 26-28).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
2. Claims 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vrtis.
With regard to Claim 14, Vrtis teaches forming plasma at power levels based on substrate size (see ¶ [0041]). To the extent the reference does not expressly teach the claimed power for plasma formation, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have employed a plasma formation power within the claimed range in conducting the process of Vrtis on substrates of varying size.
With regard to Claim 15, Vrtis teaches curing via UV wavelengths (see ¶ [0052]). Vrtis does not expressly teach provision of varying UV wavelengths during curing; however within the context of curing operations the reference teaches power and wavelength are variable and tunable to specific bonds (see ¶ [0054]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have employed curing conditions as claimed throughout the course of routine experimentation and optimization in pursuit of a desired degree of curing.
With regard to Claim 16, Vrtis teaches incorporation of methyl groups as result-effective with respect to film mechanical properties (see ¶ [0018]). To the extent the reference does not expressly teach the claimed degree of methyl incorporation, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have done so in pursuit of achieving desired mechanical properties as taught by Vrtis.
3. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vrtis as applied to Claim 1, and further in view of US 2021/0313174 to Liou et al. (“Liou”).
With regard to Claim 4, Vrtis does not expressly teach the claimed proportion of first and second precursors. Liou is similarly directed to method of producing dielectric layers, and teaches production of resilient film layers via introduction of multiple precursor gasses at proportions within the claimed range (see Abstract; ¶¶ [0038], [0053]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have employed the precursors in the claimed proportion in the method of Vrtis throughout the course of routine experimentation and optimization in pursuit of dielectric films with advantageous properties as taught by Liou.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 14 May 2026 have been fully considered but are not found persuasive.
Regarding Claims 1 and 18, Applicant argues that Vrtis does not teach providing first and second silicon-containing precursors, observing that Example 2 only teaches a single silicon-containing precursor (see Response at Pgs. 7-8). This argument is not found persuasive. Example 2 of Vrtis was cited in the treatment of Claims 1, 12, and 18 as illustrative of forming a silicon-containing layer on a substrate by forming plasma from silicon-containing precursor in processing chamber. The treatment of Claims 1, 12 and 18 also cites ¶ [0025] of Vrtis, which expressly teaches using at least one silicon-containing precursor (emphasis added).
Regarding Claim 12, Applicant argues that Vrtis does not teach or suggest the claimed dielectric constant as-deposited (see Response at Pg. 7). This argument is not found persuasive and otherwise deemed moot in view of the new grounds of rejection presented herein in response to the amendment to Claim 12. Specifically, Vrtis Claim 2 recites film dielectric constant within the claimed range prior to post-deposition treatment.
Accordingly, new grounds of rejection have been presented herein in response to the claims as amended and are otherwise maintained.
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 Michael P Rodriguez whose telephone number is (571)270-3736. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 - 6:00 Eastern M-F.
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, Michael Cleveland can be reached at 571-272-1418. 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.
/Michael P. Rodriguez/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1715
Prosecution Insights