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
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of group I, claims 1-9 in the reply filed on 11/1/23 is acknowledged. Claims 10-39 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 C.F.R. 1.142(b) as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Oath/Declaration
Oath/Declaration filed on 10/11/23 has been considered.
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 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.
(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(s) 1-4, 6, 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Liu et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0084937).
Referring to figures 8-30, Liu et al. a via structure, comprising:
a first metal structure (1003, Cu) providing an electrical conductor oriented vertically;
a second structure (1003, Co) surrounding and in contact with a bottom and sides of the first metal structure (see paragraph# 36, layer 1003 is a multilayers structure);
a third metallic structure (1001) surrounding and in contact with a bottom and sides of the second structure (see paragraph# 36);
a fourth structure (901) disposed beneath and in contact with a bottom of the third structure and having a bulk resistivity of less than or equal to 10 micro-ohm centimeter (µΩcm) (see paragraph# 35, it is noted that the same material would provide the same resistivity); and
a fifth structure (501) surrounding and in contact with sides of the third structure (see paragraph# 31), wherein a bottom surface of the fourth structure is in contact with a top surface of a metallization layer (1003) disposed below the via structure.
Regarding to claim 2, the fifth structure (501) also surrounds and is in contact with sides of the fourth structure (901, see figure 11).
Regarding to claim 3, the first metal structure comprises copper (see paragraph# 36).
Regarding to claim 4, the second structure comprises at least one of cobalt, ruthenium, or a combination thereof (see paragraph# 36).
Regarding to claim 6, the fourth structure comprises at least one of ruthenium, molybdenum, osmium, iridium, rhodium, or a combination thereof (901, see paragraph# 35).
Regarding to claim 8, the metallization layer comprises copper (1003, see paragraph# 36).
Regarding to claim 9, wherein a top surface of the first metal structure (1003) is in contact with a bottom surface of a second metallization layer (901, see figure 7).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claim 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0084937) applied in claim(s) 1-4, 6, 8 above in view of LI. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0207453).
Referring to figures 8-30, Liu et al. a via structure, comprising:
a first metal structure (1003, Cu) providing an electrical conductor oriented vertically;
a second structure (1003, Co) surrounding and in contact with a bottom and sides of the first metal structure (see paragraph# 36, layer 1003 is a multilayers structure);
a third metallic structure (1001) surrounding and in contact with a bottom and sides of the second structure (see paragraph# 36);
a fourth structure (901) disposed beneath and in contact with a bottom of the third structure and having a bulk resistivity of less than or equal to 10 micro-ohm centimeter (µΩcm) (see paragraph# 35, it is noted that the same material would provide the same resistivity); and
a fifth structure (501) surrounding and in contact with sides of the third structure (see paragraph# 31), wherein a bottom surface of the fourth structure is in contact with a top surface of a metallization layer (1003) disposed below the via structure.
However, the reference does not clearly teach the third structure (seed layer) comprises metallic tantalum.
LI teaches the third structure comprises metallic tantalum (SL, see paragraph# 47, figures 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the third structure comprises metallic tantalum in Liu et al. as taught by LI because metallic tantalum would provide reliability, diffusion blocking, and thermal stability layer.
Claim 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0084937) applied in claim(s) 1-4, 6, 8 above in view of Tagami et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2010/0096756).
al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0084937).
Referring to figures 8-30, Liu et al. a via structure, comprising:
a first metal structure (1003, Cu) providing an electrical conductor oriented vertically;
a second structure (1003, Co) surrounding and in contact with a bottom and sides of the first metal structure (see paragraph# 36, layer 1003 is a multilayers structure);
a third metallic structure (1001) surrounding and in contact with a bottom and sides of the second structure (see paragraph# 36);
a fourth structure (901) disposed beneath and in contact with a bottom of the third structure and having a bulk resistivity of less than or equal to 10 micro-ohm centimeter (µΩcm) (see paragraph# 35, it is noted that the same material would provide the same resistivity); and
a fifth structure (501) surrounding and in contact with sides of the third structure (see paragraph# 31), wherein a bottom surface of the fourth structure is in contact with a top surface of a metallization layer (1003) disposed below the via structure.
However, the reference does not clearly teach the fifth structure comprises amorphous tantalum nitride.
Tagami et al. teaches the fifth structure comprises amorphous tantalum nitride (12, see paragraph# 70, 103, 120, figures 4, 14).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the fifth structure comprises amorphous tantalum nitride in Liu et al. as taught by Tagami et al. because amorphous tantalum nitride would provide an excellent uniform barrier layer.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Thanh Nguyen whose telephone number is (571) 272-1695, or by Email via address Thanh.Nguyen@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday from 6:00AM to 3:30PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Yara Green, can be reached on (571) 270-3035. The fax phone number for this Group is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pairdirect.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to thy Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/THANH T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893