DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending before the Office for review.
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
Claims 12-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 April 10, 2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-11) in the reply filed on April 10, 2026 is acknowledged.
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 (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 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 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YASUSHI et al (JP2007318057) in view of COOPER et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2010/0176082).
With regards to claim 1, Yasushi discloses an etchant composition comprising: about 70% to 99 % by weight of phosphoric acid (Paragraph [0011]-[0012]) which falls within Applicant’s claimed range of at least 60% by weight of phosphoric acid based on a total weight of the etchant composition; a remainder of water in amounts such as 5% by weight (Paragraphs [0012], [0034) which falls within Applicant’s claimed range of at least 1% by weight of water based on the total weight of the etchant composition; and about 10ppm to about 5% by weight of a metal oxidizer (Paragraph [0019]) which overlaps Applicant’s claimed amount of no greater than 2% by weight of a metal oxidizer based on the total weight of the etchant composition. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976). MPEP 2144.05(I)
Yasushi does not explicitly disclose wherein the metal oxidizer, when in a presence of a surface comprising polysilicon, is configured to modify the surface comprising polysilicon, so as to reduce a reactivity of the surface comprising polysilicon with the phosphoric acid.
Cooper discloses an etchant composition comprising phosphoric acid, water and an oxidizer (Paragraphs [0046]-[0051 wherein the concentration of the components can be add in amounts for the composition to selectively remove silicon nitride relative to other materials including polysilicon (Paragraphs [0065]-[0073]). "Products of identical chemical composition can not have mutually exclusive properties." In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. Id MPEP 2112.01(II0 As such Yasushi as modified by Copper renders obvious Applicant’s claimed composition components and concentrations and further discloses adjusting the concentration of components in order to selectively remove Applicant’s claimed material relative to another. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art the modified composition would function to modify the surface of the polysilicon layers as this a property of the composition or in the alternative it such modification is render obvious by general teachings of Cooper. As such Yasushi as modified by Copper renders obvious wherein an etchant composition comprising phosphoric acid, water and an metal oxidizer wherein the metal oxidizer, when in a presence of a surface comprising polysilicon, is configured to modify the surface comprising polysilicon, so as to reduce a reactivity of the surface comprising polysilicon with the phosphoric acid.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the composition of Yasushi to include the configuring the modify the surface as rendered obvious by Cooper because one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would have had a reasonable expectation of predictably achieving the desired modifying with the etching using the teachings as rendered obvious by Cooper. MPEP 2143D
With regards to claim 2, the modified teachings of Yasushi renders obvious wherein the etchant composition comprises: about 70% to 99 % by weight of phosphoric acid (Yasushi Paragraph [0011]-[0012]) which falls within Applicant’s claimed range 80% to 95% by weight of the phosphoric acid based on the total weight of the etchant composition. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976). MPEP 2144.05(I)
With regards to claim 3, the modified teachings of Yasushi renders obvious wherein the etchant composition comprises: a remainder of water in amounts such as 5% by weight (Yasushi Paragraphs [0012], [0034) which falls within Applicant’s claimed range 1% to 25% by weight of the water based on the total weight of the etchant composition. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976). MPEP 2144.05(I)
With regards to claims 4-5, the modified teachings of Yasushi renders obvious wherein the etchant composition comprises: about 10ppm to about 5% by weight of a metal oxidizer (Yasushi Paragraph [0019]) which overlaps Applicant’s claimed amount of 0.001% to 1%, 0.001% to 0.1% by weight of the metal oxidizer based on the total weight of the etchant composition. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976). MPEP 2144.05(I)
With regards to claim 6-9, the modified teachings of Yasushi renders obvious wherein the metal oxidizing agent comprising molybdic acid, molybdic acid and salts thereof; molybdate and tungstate ammonium salt (Yasushi Paragraphs [0018]-[0019]) which renders obvious wherein the metal oxidizer comprises a cation of at least one of Mo+6; wherein the metal oxidizer is a dissolution product of a metal oxidizing agent wherein the metal oxidizing agent comprises at least one of molybdic acid.
With regards to claim 10, the modified teachings of Yasushi renders obvious comprising at least one of a fluoride compound, a silicon-containing compound, an alkylbenzenesulfonic acid, an alkyldiphenyl oxide disulfonic acid, a pyridine compound, or any combination thereof. (Yasushi Paragraphs [0014]-[0015]).
With regards to claim 11, the modified teachings of Yasushi renders obvious wherein the etchant composition exhibits a selectivity for silicon nitride relative to polysilicon in a range of 10:1 to 7000:1.(Cooper Paragraph [0070]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHANIE P. DUCLAIR whose telephone number is (571)270-5502. The examiner can normally be reached 9-6:30 M-F.
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, Joshua Allen can be reached at 571-270-3176. 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.
/STEPHANIE P DUCLAIR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713
Prosecution Insights