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 .
Claims 13-14 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b)
as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking
claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 05/28/25.
Applicant's election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 05/28/25 is
acknowledged.
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.
Claims 1, 3-5 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being (a)(1) by anticipated by Yugiang Ding et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2017/0104081, here after Ding).
Claim 1 is rejected. Ding teaches a method for manufacturing an alloy thin film,
the method comprising;
preparing a substrate;
providing a first precursor including a first metal onto the substrate; and
forming an alloy thin film of the first metal and a second metal, which is obtained
through a reaction of the first precursor and a second precursor, by providing the
second precursor including the second metal onto the substrate onto which the first
precursor is provided [abstract, 0081].
Claim 3 is rejected as Ding does not teach reaction gas including one of oxygen
(O) and nitrogen (N) in forming of the alloy thin film is performed without a reaction gas.
Claim 4 is rejected as the alloy thin film has a higher step coverage than an alloy
thin film of the first metal and the second metal, which is formed by a sputtering (PVD)
process [0035].
Claim 5 is rejected. The alloy thin film inherently has a lower ratio of oxygen (O)
than an alloy thin film of the first metal and the second metal, which is formed by using a
reaction gas including one of oxygen (O) and nitrogen (N), because there is less oxygen
in the environment of formation of the film (ALD vacuumed chamber with no oxygen
reactant gas).
Claims 1, 3, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being
anticipated by Cralos A. Paz et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2018/0151800, here after
Paz).
Claim 1 is rejected. Paz teaches a method for manufacturing an alloy thin
film or noble metals by ALD [0048, 0055, 0056, 0059], the method comprising;
preparing a substrate;
providing a first precursor (organometallic precursor) including a first metal
(ruthenium or iridium) onto the substrate; and
forming an alloy thin film of the first metal and a second
metal (iridium or ruthenium), which is obtained inherently through a reaction of
the first precursor and a second precursor, by providing the second precursor including
the second metal(iridium) onto the substrate onto which the first precursor is provided
[abstract, 0099-0102].
Claim 3 is rejected as Pez does not teach reaction gas including one of oxygen
(O) and nitrogen (N) in forming of the alloy thin film is performed without a reaction gas.
Claim 5 is rejected. The alloy thin film inherently has a lower ratio of oxygen (O)
than an alloy thin film of the first metal and the second metal, which is formed by using a
reaction gas including one of oxygen (O) and nitrogen (N), because there is less oxygen
in the environment of formation of the film (ALD vacuumed chamber with no oxygen
reactant gas).
Claims 1, 3, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated
by Paul R. Besser et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2017/0170114, here after Besser).
Claim 1 is rejected. Besser teaches a method for manufacturing an
alloy thin film of tantalum and titanium by ALD [abstract], the method comprising;
preparing a substrate;
providing a first precursor (tantalum chloride precursor) including a first metal
(tantalum) onto the substrate; and
forming an alloy thin film of the first metal and a second metal (titanium), which is
obtained inherently through a reaction of the first precursor and a second precursor
(titanium halide), by providing the second precursor including the second
metal(titanium) onto the substrate onto which the first precursor is provided [0009,
0013].
Claim 3 is rejected as Besser does not teach reaction gas including one of
oxygen (O) and nitrogen (N) in forming of the alloy thin film is performed without a
reaction gas.
Claim 5 is rejected. The alloy thin film inherently has a lower ratio of oxygen (O)
than an alloy thin film of the first metal and the second metal, which is formed by using a
reaction gas including one of oxygen (O) and nitrogen (N), because there is less
oxygen.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being
anticipated by Sukti Chatterjee et al (U.S. Patent Application: 2020/0340107, here after
Chatterjee).
Claim 1 is rejected. Chaterjee teaches a method for manufacturing an
alloy thin film of tantalum and titanium by ALD [abstract], the method comprising;
preparing a substrate;
providing a first precursor (hafnium precursor) including a first metal (hafnium)
onto the substrate; and
forming an alloy thin film of the first metal and a second metal (aluminum), which
is obtained inherently through a reaction of the first precursor and a second precursor,
by providing the second precursor including the second metal(aluminum) onto the
substrate onto which the first precursor is provided (by ALD when the reactant is
reducing agent) [0060].
Claim 3 is rejected as Chatterjee does not teach reaction gas including one of
oxygen (O) and nitrogen (N) in forming of the alloy thin film is performed without a
reaction gas (only reducing gas).
Claim 5 is rejected. The alloy thin film inherently has a lower ratio of oxygen (O)
than an alloy thin film of the first metal and the second metal, which is formed by using a
reaction gas including one of oxygen (O) and nitrogen (N), because there is less oxygen
in the environment of formation of the film (ALD vacuumed chamber with no oxygen
reactant gas).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dien-Yeh Wu et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2008/0107809, here after 809), further in view of Timothy W. Weidman et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2006/0240187, here after 187).
Claim 2 is rejected. 809 teaches a method for manufacturing an alloy thin film by ALD, which in fact the method comprising:
preparing a substrate and depositing the film by ALD [abstract]. 809 teaches the alloy is hafnium ruthenium alloy [0094], which in fact ALD process comprising
providing a first precursor including a first metal onto the substrate; and
forming an alloy thin film of the first metal and a second metal, which is obtained
through a reaction of the first precursor and a second precursor, by providing the second precursor including the second metal onto the substrate onto which the first precursor is provided. It is also obvious that the alloy thin film is formed by a reaction between a ligand of the first precursor and a ligand of the second precursor as it is an ALD process, and in forming eth alloy thin film, a ligand reactant, which is obtained through the reaction of the ligand of the first precursor and the ligand of the second precursor, is removed from the substrate(purging), and the first metal of the first precursor and the second metal of the second precursor remain on the substrate. 809 does not teach the ruthenium precursor is ethylcyclopentadienyl. 187 teaches in formation of ruthenium alloy via ALD, bis(ethylcyclopentadienyl) ruthenium is a suitable precursor [0058, 0012-0013]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/07/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argument regarding Ding reference for rejection of claim 1 and teaching of plasma ALD is not persuasive, Ding clearly teaches ALD without applying plasma to avoid substrate damage [abstract, 0079 last sentence].
The applicant argument regarding Paz reference for rejection of claim 1 and teaching of plasma ALD or laser ALD is not persuasive, Paz teaches ALD, and also plasma ALD and laser ALD [0059].
The applicant argument regarding Besser reference for rejection of claim 1 and teaching of separate titanium and tantalum layers is not persuasive, Besser clearly teaches ALD cycle of depositing tantalum layer and titanium layer and repeating it prior to annealing [0009-0010].
The applicant argument regarding Chaatterjee reference for rejection of claim 1 and teaching of separate layers is not persuasive, Chaatterjee teaches ALD cycle of depositing first and second metal layers to form alloy [0091].
The applicant argument regarding rejections of claim 2 is not persuasive, as the applicant amended claim 2, new rejection made for claim 2 as discussed above.
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 TABASSOM TADAYYON ESLAMI whose telephone number is (571)270-1885. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at 5712725166. 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.
/TABASSOM TADAYYON ESLAMI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Prosecution Insights