DETAILED ACTION
Claims 20-38 are pending before the Office for review.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 25, 31-32 and 36-39 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 October 29, 2025.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I Species A2 (claims 20-24, 26-30 and 33-35) in the reply filed on October 29, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 20-24, 26-29 and 33-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MALLICK et al (U.S. Patent 8,765,573).
With regards to claim 20, Mallick discloses substrate processing method comprising: preparing a substrate (204) having a recess and a first film (214) embedded in the recess (Figure 2B); and removing the first film by etching (Figures 2A-2A; Col. 5 line 20- Col. 6 line 2 discloses forming hydrocarbon material 214 and removing hydrocarbon material 214 to form air gap 216 ).
Mallick does not explicitly disclose removing the first film by etching while forming a second film so as to cover the recess from which the first film was removed by supplying a processing gas to the substrate, the processing gas including a gas contributing to film formation and a gas contributing to the etching.
However Mallik discloses forming the hydrocarbon material 216 between raised features 202 on a substrate; wherein the densified oxide film 210 is formed by depositing a containing film 208 and curing the film wherein the airgap 216 is formed during the process of forming the film 210 and removing hydrocarbon material 214 wherein an oxygen containing atmosphere is used during the cure process (Figures 2A-2A; Col. 5 line 20- Col. 6 line 2) which renders obvious removing the first film by etching while forming a second film so as to cover the recess from which the first film was removed by supplying a processing gas to the substrate, the processing gas including a gas contributing to film formation and a gas contributing to the etching.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Mallik to include removing the film by etching while forming a second film as rendered obvious by Mallik because the reference of Mallik teaches that such process allows for the formation of raised features with airgaps formed without collapse, delamination or cracking of the densified oxide film (Col. 6 lines 26-32) and one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would have had a reasonable expectation of predictably achieving the desired etching and film formation as rendered obvious by Mallik. MPEP 2143D
With regards to claim 21, the modified teachings of Mallik renders obvious wherein an air gap (216) is formed in the recess covered with the second film. (Col. 5 line 63- Col. 6 line 2).
With regards to claim 22, the modified teachings of Mallik renders obvious wherein the removing the first film by the etching and the forming the second film are performed simultaneously. (Col. 5 line 20- Col. 6 line 2 discloses wherein layer 210 is formed while etching 214 to form air gaps 216).
With regards to claim 23, the modified teachings of Mallik renders obvious wherein the second film 210 is formed so as to cover the recess from which the first film 214 was removed by giving the film formation superiority over the etching. (Col. 5 line 20- Col. 6 line 2 discloses wherein layer 210 is formed while etching 214 to form air gaps 216; wherein layer 210 is densified oxide while layer 214 is selectively removed).
With regards to claim 24, the modified teachings of Mallik renders obvious wherein the first film is partially or wholly removed by the etching. (Col. 5 line 20- Col. 6 line 2 discloses etching 214 to form air gaps 216).
With regards to claim 26, Mallick discloses substrate processing method comprising: preparing a substrate (204) having a recess and a first film (214) embedded in the recess (Figure 2B); and removing the first film by etching (Figures 2A-2A; Col. 5 line 20- Col. 6 line 2 discloses forming hydrocarbon material 214 and removing hydrocarbon material 214 to form air gap 216 ).
Mallick does not explicitly disclose removing the first film by etching while forming a second film on a portion including a wall of the recess from which the first film was removed by supplying a processing gas to the substrate, the processing gas including a gas contributing to film formation and a gas contributing to the etching.
However Mallik discloses forming the hydrocarbon material 216 between raised features 202 on a substrate; wherein the densified oxide film 210 is formed by depositing a containing film 208 wherein the film partially fills the upper region of the recess and curing the film wherein the airgap 216 is formed during the process of forming the film 210 and removing hydrocarbon material 214 wherein an oxygen containing atmosphere is used during the cure process (Figures 2A-2A; Col. 5 line 20- Col. 6 line 2) which renders obvious removing the first film by etching while forming a second film on a portion including a wall of the recess from which the first film was removed by supplying a processing gas to the substrate, the processing gas including a gas contributing to film formation and a gas contributing to the etching.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Mallik to include removing the film by etching while forming a second film as rendered obvious by Mallik because the reference of Mallik teaches that such process allows for the formation of raised features with airgaps formed without collapse, delamination or cracking of the densified oxide film (Col. 6 lines 26-32) and one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would have had a reasonable expectation of predictably achieving the desired etching and film formation as rendered obvious by Mallik. MPEP 2143D
With regards to claim 27, the modified teachings of Mallik renders obvious wherein the second film 210 is formed on the wall of the recess by giving etching superiority over the film formation. (Col. 5 line 20- Col. 6 line 2 discloses wherein layer 210 is formed partially within the recess while etching 214; wherein layer 210 is densified oxide while layer 214 is selectively removed).
With regards to claims 28 and 29, the modified teachings of Mallik renders obvious wherein the etching attains superiority over the film formation by making a ratio of the gas contributing to the etching higher than a ratio of the gas contributing to the film formation and wherein a period in which only the gas contributing to the etching is supplied is set so that the etching attains superiority over the film formation (Col. 5 line 20- Col. 6 line 2 discloses wherein the forming and etching comprises providing wherein the film may be formed using a silicon precursor which may or may not include an oxygen containing precursor; flowing an oxygen precursor to cure the CVD film to form a densified oxide film and removing the hydrocarbon material wherein the CVD precursor is not flowed and the etching is preformed).
With regards to claim 33, the modified teachings of Mallik renders obvious wherein the gas contributing to the film formation is a silicon compound gas (Col. 6 lines 34-55, Col.7 lines 37-56), and the gas contributing to the etching is an oxidizing gas as a reactive gas that reacts with the silicon compound gas. (Col. 5 lines 48-61)
With regards to claim 34, the modified teachings of Mallik renders obvious wherein the silicon compound gas is an aminosilane-based gas (Col. 6 lines 34-55, Col.7 lines 37-56), and the oxidizing gas is an O2 gas or O3 gas. (Col. 5 lines 48-61, Col 6 lined 56-64)
With regards to claim 35, the modified teachings of Mallik renders obvious wherein the first film is carbon, and the second film is a SiO2 film formed by CVD or ALD (Coll. 5 lines 57-61 discloses silicon oxide Col. 6 lines 34-55 carbon film).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 30 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The examiner previously rejected the subject matter of independent claim 26 under Mallick (U.S. Patent 8,765,573). However the cited prior art fails to teach or render obvious wherein the recess has a core material formed on an inner wall of the recess with the first film being embedded in a remaining portion and an upper portion of the substrate is recessed so that the core material and the first film are in an exposed state, and by supplying the processing gas including the gas contributing to the film formation and the gas contributing to the etching, to the substrate in the exposed state, the second film is formed as a sidewall on both sides of a portion where the core material is exposed. A further search of the prior art has failed to produce analogous art which teaches or renders obvious Applicant’s claimed invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHANIE P. DUCLAIR whose telephone number is (571)270-5502. The examiner can normally be reached 9-6:30 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, Joshua Allen can be reached at 571-270-3176. 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.
/STEPHANIE P DUCLAIR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713