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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 7/22/2025 has been entered.
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 and 4-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strautmann (US 2017/0175267).
Strautmann discloses a compound of general formula (I) [0006], wherein M is cobalt [0011], R1 and R2 may be hydrogen or alkyl groups [0008-0009] [0024-0026], X may be an amine (corresponding to L) [0031]-[0032] where R4 and R5 may be trimethylsilyl groups [0032] (hexamethyldisilazane). The compound is used for vapor deposition [0038] in a chamber [0045] by CVD or ALD [0050] and a reaction gas may be used [0048].
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 7/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues the issue amounts to a species versus genus selection. Applicant argues the Examiner has not established that it is more probable than not that a person of ordinary skill would arrive at the claimed species. In response to Applicant’s argument, Strautmann teaches the claimed ligand species as discussed in the rejection above.
Applicant argues that selection of -OR3 as L in claim 1 is not prima facie obvious over Strautmann. In response to Applicant’s argument, this argument is moot because the present prior art rejection is based on a selection of -NR4R5 as L.
Applicant argues where L is -NR4Rs, the Examiner notes that Strautmann generally discloses that ligand X may be an amine with trimethylsilyls. In response to applicant’s argument, 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 with respect to R4 and R5, Strautmann only discloses compounds where an alkylsilyl group is introduced into the N-heterocyclic carbene (NHC) ring itself. In response to Applicant’s argument, the R4 group of Strautmann corresponds to the claimed R1 group. Strautmann teaches this group can be an alkyl group ([0008-0009] [0024-0026]). The R5 group of Strautmann corresponds to a hydrogen which is implicitly present on the N-heterocyclic carbine ring of the claimed structure. Strautmann teaches this group can be a hydrogen ([0008-0009]).
Applicant argues the presently claimed invention substitutes an alkylsilyl group on an amine ligand whose nitrogen directly coordinates to the metal, whereas Strautmann introduces an alkylsilyl group on an NHC ligand whose carbene carbon coordinates to the metal. In response to Applicant’s argument, 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 and is an alkylsily group on an amine ligand whose nitrogen directly coordinates to the metal.
Applicant argues the Examples of the specification show the compounds with the claimed L groups have low melting points, high volatility, suitable decomposition temperature range, and stable thermal behavior, which can improve reactivity, reproducibility, and thin film uniformity in ALD/CVD processes. Applicant argues the compounds of Strautmann do not achieve these results. Applicant argues a person of ordinary skill in the art would not have arrived at the claimed ligand L with the expectation of the favorable effect on low-temperature processing based on the disclosure of Strautmann. Applicant argues the favorable effects include low temperature processing, volatility, and thermal stability which would not have been readily predictable by a person of ordinary skill in the art based on Strautmann. In response to applicant's argument that Strautmann did not recognize the low melting points, high volatility, suitable decomposition temperature range, and stable thermal behavior, 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 hexamethyldisilazane being a desirable ligand coordinated to the metal and further recognizes the compound for use in ALD processes. Any advantages associated with the use of a hexamethyldisilazane ligand would flow naturally from following the teachings of Strautmann.
Conclusion
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