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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claim 9 was withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 12/26/2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kadonaga et al. (JP2009-260151).
Regarding claims 1-2, Kadonaga teaches depositing a silicon nitride film doped with metal (claim 1 and abstract) by supplying (a) dichlorosilane (Fig. 6A) followed by providing (b) trimethylaluminum (Fig. 6B) followed by providing ammonia gas (Fig. 6B) wherein the process may be repeated numerous times so as to provide a structure such as the one shown in Figs. 5A or 5B referred to as “the metal doped layer” (items 100 and 110).
Regarding claim 3, during the repetition of the steps of Kadonaga as described above, the process steps would occur in the order claimed.
Regarding claim 4, during the repetition of the steps of Kadonaga as described above, the process steps would occur in the order claimed.
Regarding claim 5, for clarity it is noted that as relates to Fig. 5A for example, Kadonaga refers to 102 as an insulating layer, 104 as a metal layer and the combination of two insulating layers sandwiching a metal layer as a metal doped layer collectively (100), wherein the insulating layer of Kadonaga would read upon the undoped layer of the current claims. As such, when referring to Fig. 5B, 114 is deposited in step 1 (S1) and is an undoped layer reading upon the first step of the current claim and steps 3-5 performed thereafter and in order would form what is referred to by Kadonaga as a metal doped layer. Further “n” is referred to in essence as the number of times that an insulating layer or metal layer are formed wherein they are always formed successively on top of one another through the process shown in Figs. 6A and 6B wherein “n” may be “a positive integer of 3 or more” (see description of Fig.3). Therefore the process of Kadonaga reasonably reads upon performing the claimed steps of forming an undoped layer followed by the formation of a metal doped layer as well as forming a stacked structure thereon by repeating the process “n” times within the range provided for “n” by Kadonaga.
Regarding claim 6, the formation of the undoped layer of Kadonaga requires providing dichlorosilane and ammonia gas as shown in Fig.6A.
Regarding claim 7, it is noted that Kadonaga refers to a stack of layers provided is specifically referred to in Kadonaga as a singular “metal doped layer”. Therefore the structure of Kadonaga can reasonably be viewed as a single layer structure.
Regarding claim 8, the desired metal shown in Fig. 6A is aluminum derived from the provided trimethylaluminum.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW J BOWMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5342. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Sat 5:00AM-11:00AM.
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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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.
/ANDREW J BOWMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 1717
Prosecution Insights