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 § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 4-8, and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strautmann (US 2017/0175267).
Strautmann discloses a compound used for vapor deposition [0038] in a chamber [0045] by CVD or ALD [0050] and a reaction gas may be used [0048].
Strautmann discloses a compound of general formula (I)(iii and iv) [0006], wherein M is cobalt [0011], R1 and R2 may be hydrogen or linear or branched alkyl groups ([0008-0009], [0024-0026]; methyl, ethyl, or isopropyl), X may be an amine (corresponding to L) [0031]-[0032] where R4 and R5 may be trimethylsilyl groups [0032] (hexamethyldisilazane).
Strautmann teaches a compound of general formula (I)(i and ii) in that X is a ligand in which an oxygen atom coordinates to the metal such as alkanolates ([0032]). Strautmann is silent as to the alkyl group of the alkanolate and does not explicitly teach tert-butyl; however, Strautmann teaches tert-butyl as a preferred alkyl group for use in the other ligands ([0026], [0032]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to select a compound within the claimed Formula from the selections taught to be useful in the general formula I in Strautmann.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/5/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues Strautmann does not disclose any actual compounds with amine ligands and it is unclear how or why a person of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to arbitrarily select “hexamethyldisilazane” from the laundry list of ligands X of Strautmann. Applicant argues Strautmann discloses smaller ligands are preferred. In response to applicant’s argument, disclosed examples and preferred embodiments do not constitute a teaching away from a broader disclosure or nonpreferred embodiments. In re Susi, 440 F.2d 442, 169 USPQ 423 (CCPA 1971). Strautmann teaches X can be hexamethyldisilazane where the nitrogen atom is deprotonated and coordinated to the metal ([0032]). This group of Strautmann corresponds to the claimed -NR4R5 group.
Applicant argues that switching to bulky anionic ligands runs counter to Strautmann’s objective of improving volatility; therefore, the compounds of the present invention would not be readily derivable from Strautmann. In response to applicant’s argument, Strautmann teaches all of the claimed ligands being suitable for the invention as discussed in the rejection above.
Applicant argues it is unclear why a person of ordinary skill in the art would make the specific selections of R1 and R2 from the general disclosure of Strautmann. In response to applicant’s argument, disclosed examples and preferred embodiments do not constitute a teaching away from a broader disclosure or nonpreferred embodiments. In re Susi, 440 F.2d 442, 169 USPQ 423 (CCPA 1971). Strautmann teaches the claimed ligand species as discussed in the rejection above.
Applicant argues the examiner does not dispute any of the improvements, but ignores them because the compounds are allegedly obvious over Strautmann. In response to applicant’s argument, in response to applicant's argument that Strautmann does not teach the TGA residue or decomposition temperature of the claimed compound, the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985). Strautmann teaches the claimed ligands and further recognizes the compound for use in ALD processes. Any advantages associated with the use of the claimed ligand would flow naturally from following the teachings of Strautmann.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 TABATHA L PENNY whose telephone number is (571)270-5512. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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 on 5712721418. 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.
/TABATHA L PENNY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712
Prosecution Insights