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 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.
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 of this title, 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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Chawla et al. (Pub. No.: US 2018/0082942 A1) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Chawla et al. (Pub. No.: US 2018/0082942 A1) in view of Bhuyan et al. (Pub. No. : US 2020/0234943 A1) and Zhang et al. (“Self-Assembled Monolayers of Terminal Alkynes on Gold”; 2007) .
Regarding Claim 1, Chawla et al. discloses a method of forming a microelectronic device, the method comprising: forming a dielectric layer on a substrate, the dielectric layer comprising at least one feature defining a gap including sidewalls and a bottom including a metal surface (Par. 0011-0021; Fig. 2-8 – dielectric layer 130, gap 202, sidewalls 204, metal surface 212 of conductive trace 110);
PNG
media_image1.png
338
462
media_image1.png
Greyscale
selectively depositing a self-assembled monolayer (SAM) on the bottom of the gap and the metal surface by exposing the bottom of the gap to a silane having a formula R- SiH3. wherein R is selected from a linear or branched alkyl chain comprising from 2 to 20 carbon atoms, or by exposing the bottom of the gap to a hydrocarbon having a formula H-C≡C-R3. wherein R3 is a linear alkyl chain comprising from 1 to 20 carbon atoms, and wherein the SAM protects the metal surface from exposure to an ambient atmosphere (Par. 0011-0021; Fig. 2-8 – self-assembled monolayer 210 (blocking layer); this prior art teaches “the organic material for the blocking layer may be molecules having alkyl chains, …the alkyl chain may contain a head group, including, … alkyne …” which has the formula H-C≡C-R3, the same formula that the SAM of the instant application has; although it is true that there is not much teaching in this prior art to select particular alkynes, it is understood that the simplest alkynes would be naturally included or tried out first); selectively depositing a barrier layer on the sidewalls but not on the metal surface (Par. 0011-0021; Fig. 2-8 – barrier layer 230 (barrier liner)); and
In the alternative, assuming arguendo that Chawla et al. is not emphatic enough regarding selectively depositing a self-assembled monolayer (SAM) on the bottom of the gap and the metal surface by exposing the bottom of the gap to a silane having a formula R- SiH3. wherein R is selected from a linear or branched alkyl chain comprising from 2 to 20 carbon atoms, or by exposing the bottom of the gap to a hydrocarbon having a formula H-C≡C-R3. wherein R3 is a linear alkyl chain comprising from 1 to 20 carbon atoms, Bhuyan et al., at least implicitly, teaches selectively depositing a self-assembled monolayer (SAM) on the bottom of the gap and the metal surface by exposing the bottom of the gap to a silane having a formula R- SiH3. wherein R is selected from a linear or branched alkyl chain comprising from 2 to 20 carbon atoms, or by exposing the bottom of the gap to a hydrocarbon having a formula H-C≡C-R3. wherein R3 is a linear alkyl chain comprising from 1 to 20 carbon atoms (Par. 0019 – teaches use of silane having a formula R- SiH3. wherein R is selected from a linear or branched alkyl chain comprising from 4 to 20 carbon atoms). Furthermore, Zhang et al., at least implicitly, teaches selectively depositing a self-assembled monolayer (SAM) on the bottom of the gap and the metal surface by exposing the bottom of the gap to a silane having a formula R- SiH3. wherein R is selected from a linear or branched alkyl chain comprising from 2 to 20 carbon atoms, or by exposing the bottom of the gap to a hydrocarbon having a formula H-C≡C-R3. wherein R3 is a linear alkyl chain comprising from 1 to 20 carbon atoms (Pages 1-2 – teaches use of hydrocarbon having a formula H-C≡C-R3. wherein R3 is a linear alkyl chain comprising from 1 to 20 carbon atoms). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the teachings of Bhuyan et al. and Zhang et al. to adapt a method of forming a microelectronic device, the method comprising: selectively depositing a self-assembled monolayer (SAM) on the bottom of the gap and the metal surface of Chawla et al. by exposing the bottom of the gap to a silane having a formula R- SiH3. wherein R is selected from a linear or branched alkyl chain comprising from 2 to 20 carbon atoms, or by exposing the bottom of the gap to a hydrocarbon having a formula H-C≡C-R3. wherein R3 is a linear alkyl chain comprising from 1 to 20 carbon atoms in order to form an effective blocking layer on the metal surface.
2, Claims 2-7 & 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Chawla et al. (Pub. No.: US 2018/0082942 A1), as applied to claim 1, further in view of Applicant Admitted Prior Art (hereinafter AAPA); or rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Chawla et al. (Pub. No.: US 2018/0082942 A1), Bhuyan et al. (Pub. No. : US 2020/0234943 A1) and Zhang et al. (“Self-Assembled Monolayers of Terminal Alkynes on Gold”; 2007), as applied to claim 1, further in view of Applicant Admitted Prior Art (hereinafter AAPA).
.
Regarding Claim 2, modified Chawla et al., as applied to Claim 1, disclosesthe method, wherein the substrate is in a first substrate processing chamber and selectively depositing the SAM occurs in the first substrate processing chamber (Par. 0017 – although this prior art is silent regarding the apparatus used to deposit the SAM, it is implied that a certain substrate processing chamber has been used to carry out the deposition; that substrate processing chamber could be considered as the first substrate processing chamber). Modified Chawla et al. is silent regardingthe method further comprises moving the substrate outside the first substrate processing chamber and exposing the substrate and the SAM to the ambient atmosphere, which is outside the first substrate processing chamber. AAPA, at least implicitly, teachesthe method further comprises moving the substrate outside the first substrate processing chamber (Par. 0005 – Background teaches that the substrate is typically processed in multiple processing chambers to form various layers; so, it would be typical/normal if the SAM and barrier layer are deposited in different chambers, although “air break” might be avoided during the transfer from one processing chamber to the other, it is a costly affair). In a nutshell, Chawla et al. is silent regarding the use of multiple substrate processing chambers for the deposition of different layers. AAPA teaches the use of multiple substrate processing chambers for the deposition of different layers but does not teach air-break during the transfer of the substrate from one processing chamber to the other.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the teachings of AAPA to adapt the method further comprises moving the substrate of Chawla et al. outside the first substrate processing chamber in order to use a different chamber for the deposition of a different layer in order to avoid contamination of the chambers and use specially designed optimized chambers for the deposition of each layer
Modified Chawla et al. discloses the claimed invention except for the method comprising exposing the substrate and the SAM to the ambient atmosphere. It is universally known that a multiple substrate processing system wherein the entire process including the transfer of the substrate from one chamber to another chamber is carried out under vacuum is expensive and procurement and use of it would be avoided if contamination or degradation does not occur during the exposure. Now, both Chawla et al. and the instant application are using similar material for SAM, that is, they have similar functionalities, i.e., they will not degrade during exposure. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to adapt the method comprising exposing the substrate and the SAM to the ambient atmosphere, since it has been held that choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.__, __, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007)
Regarding Claim 3, modified Chawla et al., as applied to Claim 2, disclosesthe method, further comprising selectively depositing the barrier layer on the sidewall in a second substrate processing chamber that is separate from the first substrate processing chamber (please see the rejection of claim 2).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Chawla et al., as applied to Claim 2, disclosesthe method, wherein the SAM is resistant to degradation when exposed to air (Chawla et al. -Par. 0011-0021; Fig. 2-8 (please see the rejection of claim 1) –this prior art teaches regarding SAM (blocking layer) “the organic material for the blocking layer may be molecules having alkyl chains, …the alkyl chain may contain a head group, including, … alkyne …” which has the formula H-C≡C-R3, the same formula that the SAM of the instant application has; it suggests that this SAM material of this prior art will be just as resistant to air degradation as the SAM material of the present application; Zhang et al. -Par. 0011-0021; Fig. 2-8 (please see the rejection of claim 1) –this prior art teaches regarding SAM (blocking layer) which has the formula H-C≡C-R3, the same formula that the SAM of the instant application has; it suggests that this SAM material of this prior art will be just as resistant to air degradation as the SAM material of the present application).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Chawla et al., as applied to Claim 2, disclosesthe method, comprises densely packed molecules on the metal surface (Chawla et al. - Par. 0017; Fig. 2-8; and Zhang et al. - Pages 1-2 – the SAM could be a hydrocarbon, such as, molecules having alkyl chains, wherein the alkyl chains may comprise between one (1) and twenty-two (22) carbon atoms; these molecules are well-known to pack densely on the metal surface).
Regarding Claim 6, modified Chawla et al., as applied to Claim 2, disclosesthe method, wherein selectively depositing the SAM comprises exposing the bottom of the gap to the hydrocarbon having the formula H-C≡C-R3, wherein R3 is a linear alkyl chain comprising from 1 to 20 carbon atoms (please see rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding Claim 7, modified Chawla et al., as applied to Claim 2, discloses the method, wherein selectively depositing the SAM comprises exposing the bottom of the gap to the silane having the formula R-SiH3, wherein R is selected from a linear or branched alkyl chain comprising from 2 to 20 carbon atoms (please see rejection of claim 1 above). .
Regarding Claim 10, modified Chawla et al., as applied to Claim 6, disclosesthe method, wherein the hydrocarbon is resistant to degradation when exposed to air (Chawla et al. -Par. 0011-0021; Fig. 2-8 (please see the rejection of claim 1) –this prior art teaches regarding SAM (blocking layer) “the organic material for the blocking layer may be molecules having alkyl chains, …the alkyl chain may contain a head group, including, … alkyne …” which has the formula H-C≡C-R3, the same formula that the SAM of the instant application has; it suggests that this SAM material of this prior art will be just as resistant to air degradation as the SAM material of the present application; Zhang et al. -Par. 0011-0021; Fig. 2-8 (please see the rejection of claim 1) –this prior art teaches regarding SAM (blocking layer) which has the formula H-C≡C-R3, the same formula that the SAM of the instant application has; it suggests that this SAM material of this prior art will be just as resistant to air degradation as the SAM material of the present application).
Regarding Claim 11, modified Chawla et al., as applied to Claim 2, disclosesthe method, wherein the SAM blocks deposition of the barrier layer on the metal surface after the substrate has been exposed to the ambient atmosphere (Chawla et al. - Par. 0011-0021; Fig. 2-8 –this prior art teaches regarding SAM (blocking layer) “the organic material for the blocking layer may be molecules having alkyl chains, …the alkyl chain may contain a head group, including, … alkyne …” which has the formula H-C≡C-R3, the same formula that the SAM of the instant application has; it suggests that this SAM material of this prior art will be just as resistant to air degradation as the SAM material of the present application; Fig. 5 shows the SAM blocks deposition of the barrier layer on the metal surface after the substrate has been exposed to the ambient atmosphere (in light of the rejection of claim 2).
Regarding Claim 12, modified Chawla et al., as applied to Claim 11, disclosesthe method, wherein the metal surface comprises Cu (Chawla et al. - Par. 0011).
3, Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Chawla et al. (Pub. No.: US 2018/0082942 A1) and Applicant Admitted Prior Art (hereinafter AAPA), as applied to claim 12, further in view of Lionti et al. (“Area-Selective Deposition of Tantalum Nitride with Polymerizable Monolayers: From Liquid to Vapor Phase Inhibitors” - 2022); or rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Chawla et al. (Pub. No.: US 2018/0082942 A1), Bhuyan et al. (Pub. No. : US 2020/0234943 A1), Zhang et al. (“Self-Assembled Monolayers of Terminal Alkynes on Gold”; 2007) and Applicant Admitted Prior Art (hereinafter AAPA), as applied to claim 12, further in view of Lionti et al. (“Area-Selective Deposition of Tantalum Nitride with Polymerizable Monolayers: From Liquid to Vapor Phase Inhibitors” - 2022).
Regarding Claim 13, modified Chawla et al., as applied to Claim 12, disclosesthe method, wherein the barrier layer comprises HfO2 or ZrO2 (Par. 0018). Modified Chawla et al. does not explicitly disclosethe method, wherein the barrier layer comprises TaN. However, Lionti et al. teachesthe method, wherein the barrier layer comprises TaN (Introduction Section; Fig. 8 – TaN barrier layer). In short, Chawla et al. discloses a barrier layer comprising metal oxides, such as HfO2 or ZrO2. Lionti et al., on the other hand, teaches use of TaN as the barrier layer. So, all these materials are known to be used as a barrier material. Modified Chawla et al. discloses the claimed invention except for the method, wherein the barrier layer comprises TaN. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to adapt the method, wherein the barrier layer comprises TaN, since it has been held that the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is obvious.
4, Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Chawla et al. (Pub. No.: US 2018/0082942 A1) and Applicant Admitted Prior Art (hereinafter AAPA), as applied to claim 12, further in view of Lakshmanan et al. (Pub. No.: US 2013/0140698 A1); or rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Chawla et al. (Pub. No.: US 2018/0082942 A1), Bhuyan et al. (Pub. No. : US 2020/0234943 A1), Zhang et al. (“Self-Assembled Monolayers of Terminal Alkynes on Gold”; 2007) and Applicant Admitted Prior Art (hereinafter AAPA), as applied to claim 12, further in view of Lakshmanan et al. (Pub. No.: US 2013/0140698 A1)..
Regarding Claim 14, modified Chawla et al., as applied to Claim 12, disclosesthe method, wherein the barrier layer comprises HfO2 or ZrO2 (Par. 0018). Modified Chawla et al. does not explicitly disclosethe method, wherein the barrier layer comprises doped TaN. However, Lakshmanan et al. teachesthe method, wherein the barrier layer comprises doped TaN (abstract, Par. 0023; Fig. 1B – barrier layer 130 comprises doped TaN; doping TaN with dopants such as Ru, Cu, Co etc. are known to improve barrier properties against Cu diffusion). In short, Chawla et al. discloses a barrier layer comprising metal oxides, such as HfO2 or ZrO2. Lakshmanan et al., on the other hand teaches use of TaN as the barrier layer. So, clearly both are known to be used as barrier material. Now, barrier properties of TaN can be further improved by doping it with certain dopants. such as, Ru, Cu, Co etc. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the teachings of Lakshmanan et al. to adapt the method, wherein the barrier layer of Chawla et al. comprises doped TaN in order to establish low resistance contact with enhanced barrier protection.
5, Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Chawla et al. (Pub. No.: US 2018/0082942 A1) and Applicant Admitted Prior Art (hereinafter AAPA), as applied to claim 12, further in view of Lazovsky et al. (Pub. No. : US 2006/0108320 A1); or rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Chawla et al. (Pub. No.: US 2018/0082942 A1), Bhuyan et al. (Pub. No. : US 2020/0234943 A1), Zhang et al. (“Self-Assembled Monolayers of Terminal Alkynes on Gold”; 2007) and Applicant Admitted Prior Art (hereinafter AAPA), as applied to claim 12, further in view of Lazovsky et al. (Pub. No. : US 2006/0108320 A1)..
Regarding Claim 15, modified Chawla et al., as applied to Claim 12, disclosesthe method, wherein the barrier layer comprises HfO2 or ZrO2 (Par. 0018). Modified Chawla et al. does not explicitly disclosethe method, wherein the barrier layer comprises Ru. However, Lazovsky et al. teachesthe method, wherein the barrier layer comprises Ru (abstract, Par. 0059 – this prior art teaches use of Ru as barrier material . In short, Chawla et al. discloses a barrier layer comprising metal oxides, such as HfO2 or ZrO2. Lazovsky et al., on the other hand teaches use of Ru as the barrier layer. So, all these materials are known to be used as a barrier material. Modified Chawla et al. discloses the claimed invention except for the method, wherein the barrier layer comprises Ru. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to adapt the method, wherein the barrier layer comprises Ru, since it has been held that the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is obvious.
6, Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Chawla et al. (Pub. No.: US 2018/0082942 A1), as applied to claim 1, further in view of Ke et al. (Pub. No. : US 2021/0217615 A1); or rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Chawla et al. (Pub. No.: US 2018/0082942 A1), Bhuyan et al. (Pub. No. : US 2020/0234943 A1) and Zhang et al. (“Self-Assembled Monolayers of Terminal Alkynes on Gold”; 2007), as applied to claim 1, further in view of Ke et al. (Pub. No. : US 2021/0217615 A1).
Regarding Claim 16, modified Chawla et al., as applied to claim 1, does not explicitly disclose the method, wherein the SAM is deposited by atomic layer deposition. However, Ke et al. teachesthe method, wherein the SAM is deposited by atomic layer deposition (Par. 0025) . Chawla et al. discloses the claimed invention except for the method, wherein the SAM is deposited by atomic layer deposition. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to adapt the method, wherein the SAM is deposited by atomic layer deposition, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.__, __, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007)
Regarding Claim 17, modified Chawla et al., as applied to Claim 16, disclosesthe method, wherein the barrier layer is deposited by atomic layer deposition (Chawla et al. - Par. 0018).
Regarding Claim 18, modified Chawla et al., as applied to claim 17, discloses the method, wherein removing the SAM comprises exposing the SAM to a plasma (Ke et al. - Par. 0048, 0062; Figs. 2-4).
Regarding Claim 19, modified Chawla et al., as applied to claim 18, discloses the method, wherein the plasma is an inductively coupled plasma (Ke et al. - Par. 0048, 0062; Figs. 2-4).
Regarding Claim 20, modified Chawla et al., as applied to claim 18, discloses the method, wherein the plasma is an capacitively coupled plasma (Ke et al. - Par. 0048, 0062; Figs. 2-4).
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed on 06/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are moot because of the new grounds of rejection necessitated by amendments made to the claims.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 SYED I GHEYAS whose telephone number is (571)272-0592. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:30 AM - 5:30 PM EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Britt Hanley, can be reached at telephone number (571)270-3042. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned 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://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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.
07/25/2026
/SYED I GHEYAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights