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 .
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1 and 18 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “…the recessed feature comprising; sidewalls, a bottom surface, and an opening”. This clause is recommended to be rephrased as “…the recessed feature comprising: sidewalls, a bottom surface, and an opening”.
Claim 18 is missing a period at the end of the claim, appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 12 recites “preferentially etching the metal nitride liner proximate to the opening of the recessed feature” in lines 6-7 and “wherein the cyclical deposition-etch process preferentially forms a molybdenum metal proximate to the bottom surface of the recessed feature” in lines 11-12. The limitation “preferentially” renders this claim indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as it creates uncertainty about whether the features after the term preferentially are required limitations. For the purposes of examination with respect to prior art, these have been interpreted as required limitations in view of Applicant’s disclosure (see fig. 2, paragraph [0066] of US PGPUB).
Claim 12 further recites “wherein the etch portion of the cyclical deposition-etch process; and” in line 13. This seems to be an incomplete claim phrase. This limitation could not be treated on the merits due to the lack of clarity of its meaning relative to other limitations in the claim.
Dependent claims 13-20 do not rectify the deficiencies and likewise, rejected under this section.
Claims 13, 15, 16 and 18 also recite the term “preferentially” which renders these claims indefinite, in a similar manner as explained in claim 12 above.
Dependent claim 14 do not rectify the deficiencies and likewise, rejected under this section.
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.
Claim(s) 1-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Na et al. (US 20240047269 A1; hereinafter “Na”) in view of Lai et al. (US 20250183097 A1; hereinafter “Lai”).
In re claim 1, Na discloses in figs. 6, 7A-7E, a method for filling a recessed feature on a substrate, the method comprising:
providing a substrate 710, 713 including a recessed feature 701 (fig. 7A; ¶128);
the recessed feature 701 comprising:
sidewalls 711, a bottom surface 705, and an opening (e.g., an opening of the feature 701) (fig. 7A; ¶128); and
a metal liner layer 715 disposed over at least the sidewalls 711, and the bottom surface 705 (fig. 7A);
removing at least a portion of the metal liner layer 715 (fig. 7B; ¶129);
partially filing the recessed feature with a molybdenum metal 721 by a cyclical deposition-etch process (fig. 7C-7D; ¶130),
wherein a unit cycle of the cyclical deposition-etch process comprises:
partially filing the recessed feature 701 with molybdenum metal 721 by performing one or more unit cycles of a first cyclical deposition process (fig. 7C; ¶130), and
partially etching the molybdenum metal 721 (fig. 7D; ¶131); and
filing the recessed feature with additional molybdenum metal 723 by performing one or more unit cycles of a second cyclical deposition process (fig. 7E; ¶132).
Na does not expressly disclose:
wherein the first cyclical deposition process deposits a molybdenum metal at a greater deposition rate per cycle proximate to the bottom surface of the recessed feature compared with the deposition rate per cycle proximate to the opening of the recessed feature.
In the same field of endeavor, Lai discloses in figs. 2, 6, a method, wherein a first cyclical deposition process deposits a molybdenum metal 111 at a greater deposition rate per cycle proximate to the bottom surface of a recessed feature 104 compared with the deposition rate per cycle proximate to the opening of the recessed feature 104 (as shown in fig. 1B and 2, molybdenum metal 111 a greater deposition rate per cycle proximate to the bottom surface of a recessed feature 104 compared with the deposition rate per cycle proximate to the opening of the recessed feature; ¶77).
It 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 to employ the teachings of Lai into the method of Na in order to efficiently deposit low resistivity metal films as devices shrink and more complex patterning schemes are utilized in the industry and prevent voids and/or seams developing in filled features (¶3, 77 of Lai).
In re claim 2, Na, as modified by Lai, discloses the method of claim 1.
Na further discloses wherein a unit cycle of the first cyclical deposition process and a unit cycle of the second cyclical deposition process comprises, contacting the substrate 710, 713 with a first vapor phase reactant comprising a molybdenum oxyhalide, and contacting the substrate with a second vapor phase reactant comprising a reducing agent (¶78-79, 130).
In re claim 3, Na, as modified by Lai, discloses the method of claim 2.
Na further discloses wherein the molybdenum oxyhalide comprises molybdenum (IV) dichloride dioxide (MoO2Cl2) (¶21, 67, 132).
In re claim 4, Na, as modified by Lai, discloses the method of claim 1.
Na further discloses in fig. 7B, wherein removing at least a portion of the metal liner layer 715 further comprises, contacting the metal liner layer 715 with a gaseous chloride based etchant 719 (¶121, 129; e.g., pulsed soak may be used, cycling the precursor gas while flowing a purge gas.).
In re claim 5, Na, as modified by Lai, discloses the method of claim 4.
Na further discloses in fig. 7B, wherein contacting the metal liner layer 715 with the gaseous chloride based etchant 719 further comprises, removing a greater portion of the metal liner layer 715 proximate to the opening of the recessed feature 701 compared with the portion of the metal liner layer 715 removed proximate to the bottom 705 of the recessed feature (¶121, 129).
In re claim 6, Na, as modified by Lai, discloses the method of claim 4.
Na further discloses in fig. 7B, wherein the gaseous chloride based etchant comprises at least of one molybdenum pentachloride (MoCI5) (¶121), and tungsten pentachloride (WCI5).
In re claim 7, Na, as modified by Lai, discloses the method of claim 1.
Na further discloses in figs. 6, 7A-7E, wherein the metal liner layer 715 comprises a metal nitride liner layer (¶128).
In re claim 8, Na, as modified by Lai, discloses the method of claim 1.
Na further discloses in figs. 6, 7A-7E, wherein partially filing the recessed feature with a molybdenum metal 721 by a cyclical deposition-etch process further comprises, forming a greater thickness of the molybdenum metal 721 proximate to the bottom surface 705 of the recessed feature compared with the thickness of the molybdenum metal 721 formed proximate to the opening of the recessed feature 701 (as modified by Lai’s teachings described above in claim 1).
In re claim 9, Na, as modified by Lai, discloses the method of claim 8.
Na further discloses in figs. 6, 7A-7E, wherein partially filing and subsequently filing the recessed feature with molybdenum metal 721 and additional molybdenum metal 723 further comprises, seamlessly filling the recessed feature 701 (fig. 7E; ¶132, 101).
In re claim 10, Na, as modified by Lai, discloses the method of claim 1.
Na further discloses in figs. 6, 7A-7E, wherein partially etching the molybdenum metal 721 comprises a cyclical etch-purge process (fig. 7D; ¶125, 131).
In re claim 11, Na, as modified by Lai, discloses a structure (fig. 7E of Na) formed according to the method of claim 1.
Claim(s) 12-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Na et al. (US 20240047269 A1; hereinafter “Na”).
In re claim 12, Na discloses in figs. 6, 7A-7E, a method for seamlessly filling a recessed feature on a substrate with a molybdenum metal, the method comprising:
providing a substrate 710, 713 including a recessed feature 701 (fig. 7A; ¶128);
the recessed feature 701 comprising an opening as well as sidewalls 711 and a bottom surface 705 covered with a metal nitride liner 715 (fig. 7A; ¶128);
preferentially etching the metal nitride liner 715 proximate to the opening of the recessed feature 701 (fig. 7B; ¶129);
partially filing the recessed feature 701 with molybdenum metal 721 by a cyclical deposition-etch process (fig. 7C-7D; ¶130),
wherein the cyclical deposition-etch process preferentially forms a molybdenum metal 721 proximate to the bottom surface 705 of the recessed feature (fig. 7C-7D; ¶130) and
wherein the etch portion of the cyclical deposition-etch process (This limitation could not be treated on the merits due to the lack of clarity of its meaning relative to other limitations in the claim, as explained above in 112(b)); and
filing the recessed feature 701 with additional molybdenum metal 723 by performing one or more unit cycles of a cyclical deposition process (fig. 7E; ¶132).
Na further discloses in fig. 7B, the etch removes any TiN layer on the field and may remove part or all of the TiN layer on the substrate sidewall. In the embodiment shown, part of the TiN layer 715 remains on the sidewalls such that the TiN layer is thicker at the bottom portion of the sidewall relative to the upper portion. The TiN layer remains as the bottom surface 705 and may be the thickest portion of the remaining TiN layer in the feature 701 (¶129). Therefore, Na has a teaching of a higher etch rate of the metal nitride liner 715 proximate to the opening of the recessed feature compared to the etch rate of the metal nitride liner proximate to the bottom surface of the recessed feature. Na does not have expressed teachings of 300% higher etch rate at the top of the metal nitride liner compared to the bottom surface.
However, it 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 to employ the teachings of Na and make the etch rate of the metal nitride liner 715 proximate to the opening of the recessed feature is up to 300% greater than the etch rate of the metal nitride liner proximate to the bottom surface of the recessed feature, in order to reduce etch time and improve fabrication efficiency.
“[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” See MPEP 2144.05 II. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955); see also Peterson, 315 F.3d at 1330, 65 USPQ2d at 1382; In re Hoeschele, 406 F.2d 1403, 160 USPQ 809 (CCPA 1969). For more recent cases applying this principle, see Merck & Co. Inc. v. Biocraft Lab. Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989); In re Kulling, 897 F.2d 1147, 14 USPQ2d 1056 (Fed. Cir. 1990); and In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 43 USPQ2d 1362 (Fed. Cir. 1997); Smith v. Nichols, 88 U.S. 112, 118-19 (1874); In re Williams, 36 F.2d 436, 438 (CCPA 1929). See also KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416 (2007).
In re claim 13, Na discloses the method of claim 12, wherein preferentially etching the metal nitride liner further comprises, contacting the metal nitride liner 715 with a gaseous chloride based etchant 719 (¶121, 129; e.g., pulsed soak may be used, cycling the precursor gas while flowing a purge gas.).
In re claim 14, Na discloses the method of claim 13, wherein the chloride based etchant comprises at least one of molybdenum pentachloride (MoCI5) (¶121), and tungsten pentachloride (WCI5).
In re claim 15, Na discloses in figs. 6, 7A-7E, the method of claim 12, wherein preferentially etching the metal nitride liner layer further comprises,
etching the metal nitride liner 715 proximate to the opening of the recessed feature at a higher etch rate compared with the etch rate of the metal nitride liner proximate to the bottom of the recessed feature (¶129).
In re claim 16, Na discloses the method of claim 15, part of the TiN layer 715 remains on the sidewalls such that the TiN layer is thicker at the bottom portion of the sidewall relative to the upper portion (¶fig. 7B; ¶129) and the etch of the titanium nitride layer can be controlled to leave the titanium nitride layer at a desired thickness (¶47).
Therefore, Na has a teaching of a thinner metal nitride liner 715 proximate to the opening of the recessed feature compared to thicker metal nitride liner proximate to the bottom surface of the recessed feature in order to protect underlying stack 710 during subsequent processing. Na does not have expressed teachings of wherein the metal nitride liner 715 proximate to the opening of the recessed feature 701 is preferentially etched to a thickness of less than 5 Angstroms.
However, it 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 to employ the teachings of Na and make the metal nitride liner 715 proximate to the opening of the recessed feature 701 is preferentially etched to a thickness of less than 5 Angstroms, in order to protect underlying stack 710 during subsequent processing and deposit the initial Mo layer on the sidewalls.
“[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” See MPEP 2144.05 II. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955); see also Peterson, 315 F.3d at 1330, 65 USPQ2d at 1382; In re Hoeschele, 406 F.2d 1403, 160 USPQ 809 (CCPA 1969). For more recent cases applying this principle, see Merck & Co. Inc. v. Biocraft Lab. Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989); In re Kulling, 897 F.2d 1147, 14 USPQ2d 1056 (Fed. Cir. 1990); and In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 43 USPQ2d 1362 (Fed. Cir. 1997); Smith v. Nichols, 88 U.S. 112, 118-19 (1874); In re Williams, 36 F.2d 436, 438 (CCPA 1929). See also KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416 (2007).
In re claim 17, Na discloses in figs. 6, 7A-7E, the method of claim 12, wherein the metal nitride liner 715 comprises at least one of a titanium nitride liner (¶129), and a tantalum nitride liner.
In re claim 18, Na discloses in figs. 6, 7A-7E, the method of claim 12, wherein preferentially etching the metal nitride liner 715 comprises a cyclical etch-purge process (¶121, 129; e.g., pulsed soak may be used, cycling the precursor gas while flowing a purge gas.)
In re claim 19, Na discloses in fig. 7E, a structure formed according to the method of claim 12.
In re claim 20, Na discloses in fig. 8, apparatus configured for performing the method of claim 12 (¶133-143).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NILUFA RAHIM whose telephone number is (571)272-8926. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5:30pm 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, Yara J. Green can be reached at (571) 270-3035. 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.
/NILUFA RAHIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893