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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending. Note that, Applicant’s response filed December 31, 2025, has been entered.
Claims 15-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 July 2, 2025.
Objections/Rejections Withdrawn
The following objections/rejections as set forth in the Office action mailed 10/9/25 have been withdrawn:
The rejection of claims 1-9 and 11-14 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO2010/104816, has been withdrawn.
The rejection of claim 10 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2010/104816, has been withdrawn.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
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.
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.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2006/081406.
With respect to independent, instant claim 1, ‘406 teaches compositions useful in microelectronic device manufacturing for surface preparation and/or cleaning of wafer substrates such as microelectronic device precursor structures. The compositions can be employed for processing of wafers that have, or are intended to be further processed to include, copper metallization, e.g., in operations such as surface preparation, pre-plating cleaning, post-etching cleaning, and post-chemical mechanical polishing cleaning of microelectronic device wafers. The compositions contain (i) alkanolamine, (ii) quaternary ammonium hydroxide and (iii) a complexing agent, and are storage-stable. See Abstract. Suitable complexing agents include proline, quinic acid, etc., and are included in amounts from 0.001 to 20% by weight. Suitable quaternary ammonium hydroxides that may be useful in specific compositions include, without limitation, choline, tetrabutylammoniumhydroxide, tetraethylammonium hydroxide, tetramethylammonium hydroxide, tetrapropylammoniumhydroxide, and combinations thereof, which may be used in an amount of from about 0.005% to about 40% by weight. See para. 88. Note that, the Examiner asserts that mixing a complexing agent such as proline with choline would form a cleaning accelerator as recited by the instant claims. This is evidenced by the instant specification which states that mixing various compounds together with a nitrogen containing compound form the cleaning accelerator as recited by the instant claims (See paras. 23, 79-84, and 125 of the instant specification).
‘406 does not teach, with sufficient specificity, a composition containing a solvent, a cleaning accelerator, and the other requisite components of the composition in the specific amounts as recited by independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims.
Nonetheless it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, a composition containing a solvent, a cleaning accelerator, and the other requisite components of the composition in the specific amounts as recited by independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims, with a reasonable expectation of success and similar results with respect to other disclosed components, because the broad teachings of ‘406 suggest a composition containing a solvent, a cleaning accelerator, and the other requisite components of the composition in the specific amounts as recited by independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over White et al (US2020/0199500).
With respect to independent, instant claim 1, White et al teach a cleaning composition is disclosed for cleaning residue and/or contaminants from microelectronic devices having same thereon. The composition comprises at least one complexing agent, at least one cleaning additive, at least one pH adjusting agent, water, and at least one oxylamine compound. See Abstract. The compositions contain at least 50% water. See para. 33. Complexing agents include proline, ammonium citrate, tricarballylic acid, dimethylolpropionic acid, trimethylolpropionic acid, tartaric acid, etc., in amounts from about 0.01 wt % to about 20 wt %, based on the total weight of the cleaning composition. Preferably, the complexing agent is present in an amount of from about 0.01 wt % to about 10 wt %, based on the total weight of the cleaning composition, and, more preferably, in an amount of from about 0.01 wt % to about 5 wt %. See paras 37-38. The cleaning composition of the present disclosure comprises at least one pH adjusting agent used to raise or lower the pH of the composition to a target value. While the pH adjusting agent may include acids and/or bases, preferably the pH adjusting agent is a base and is used to raise the pH of the cleaning composition. Illustrative bases include, but are not limited to, alkali metal hydroxides (e.g., LiOН, KOH, RbOH, CsOH), alkaline earth metal hydroxides (e.g., Be(OH)2, Mg(OH)2, Ca(OH)2, Sr(OH)2, Ba(OH)2), ammonium hydroxide (i.e., ammonia), and a tetraalkylammonium hydroxide compound having the formula NR¹R²R³R4OH, etc. The pH adjusting agent may be present in an amount of from about 0.1 wt % to about 10 wt %, based on the total weight of the cleaning composition, and, more preferably, in an amount of from about 1 wt % to about 5 wt %. See para. 46. Note that, the Examiner asserts that mixing a complexing agent such as tartaric acid with ammonium hydroxide would form a cleaning accelerator as recited by the instant claims. This is evidenced by the instant specification which states that mixing various compounds together with a nitrogen containing compound form the cleaning accelerator as recited by the instant claims (See paras. 23, 79-84, and 125 of the instant specification).
White et al do not teach, with sufficient specificity, a composition containing a solvent, a cleaning accelerator, and the other requisite components of the composition in the specific amounts as recited by independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims.
Nonetheless it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, a composition containing a solvent, a cleaning accelerator, and the other requisite components of the composition in the specific amounts as recited by independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims, with a reasonable expectation of success and similar results with respect to other disclosed components, because the broad teachings of White et al suggest a composition containing a solvent, a cleaning accelerator, and the other requisite components of the composition in the specific amounts as recited by independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2004/094581.
With respect to independent, instant claim 1, ‘581 teaches dilute fluoride solutions and methods for cleaning plasma etch residue form semiconductor substrates including such dilute solutions. The compositions and methods according to the invention can advantageously provide both cleaning efficiency and material compatibility. See Abstract. The preferred dilute aqueous cleaner and residue remover contains from 0.02% to 0.18% by weight of a fluoride-containing compound selected from the group consisting of ammonium fluoride, alkylammonium fluorides, ethanolamine fluoride, ammonium biflouride, alkylammonium bifluorides, or a mixture thereof; between 15% to 35% by weight water; from 59% to 84% by weight total of an amide and an ether solvent, from 0.2% to 5% by weight of an acid selected from sulfamic acid, phosphonic acid, a soluble phosphonic acid derivative, or mixture thereof; and from 0.2% to 5% by weight of an alkanolamine. See para. 19. Additional alkaline components include comprise an alkaline compound such as ammonium tartrate, ammonium malate, etc., and quaternary ammonium compounds such as choline hydroxide, ammonium hydroxide, etc. See paras. 50-70. In one embodiment, alkaline compounds according to the invention may be present in the
solution in an amount from about 0.3% to about 5%, alternately from about 0.4% to about 3%, from about 0.5% to about 3%, from about 0.2% to about 1.5%, from about 0.2% to about 2%, from about 0.2% to about 1 %, from about 0.5% to about 1.5%, from about 1.5% to about 3%, or from about 1.5% to about 2.5%. See para. 70.
‘581 does not teach, with sufficient specificity, a composition containing a solvent, a cleaning accelerator, and the other requisite components of the composition in the specific amounts as recited by independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims.
Nonetheless it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, a composition containing a solvent, a cleaning accelerator, and the other requisite components of the composition in the specific amounts as recited by independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims, with a reasonable expectation of success and similar results with respect to other disclosed components, because the broad teachings of ‘581 suggest a composition containing a solvent, a cleaning accelerator, and the other requisite components of the composition in the specific amounts as recited by independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims.
Response to Arguments
With respect to the rejection of the instant claims under 35 USC 103 using WO2006/081406 or White et al, Applicant states that ‘406 or White et al do not teach the specific cleaning accelerator as recited by the instant claims.
In response, note that, the Examiner asserts that ‘406 and White et al teach the use of complexing agents such as proline, quinic acid, etc.; and tartaric acid, respectively, and in combination with choline or ammonium hydroxide, which would form the cleaning accelerator as recited by the instant claims. This is evidenced by the instant specification which states that mixing various compounds together (i.e., proline, tartaric acid, etc.) with a nitrogen containing compound form the cleaning accelerator as recited by the instant claims (See paras. 23, 79-84, and 125 of the instant specification). Thus, the Examiner asserts that the teachings of ‘406 or White et al are sufficient to render the claimed invention obvious under 35 USC 103.
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 GREGORY R DEL COTTO whose telephone number is (571)272-1312. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30am-6:00pm, EST.
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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at (571) 272-2817. 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.
/GREGORY R DELCOTTO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
/G.R.D/April 20, 2025
Prosecution Insights