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
Claims 1-6 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
With respect to instant claim 1, line 4, it is suggested that Applicant delete “containing” and insert “comprising”.
In claim 2, line 2, it is suggested that Applicant delete “includes” and insert “comprises”.
In claim 3, line 2, it is suggested that Applicant delete “containing” and insert “comprising”.
In claim 3, line 3, it is suggested that Applicant delete “includes” and insert “comprises”.
In claim 3, line 3, it is suggested that Applicant delete “kind of”.
In claim 4, line 2, it is suggested that Applicant delete “contained” and insert “comprised”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(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 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, 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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ueno et al (US2014/0087313).
With respect to independent, instant claim 1, Ueno et al teach a stripping solution for photolithography according to the present invention which contains (A) hydrofluoric acid, (B) a basic compound, and (C) water. A content of hydrofluoric acid in the stripping solution is preferably from 0.05 to 0.5% by mass, and more preferably from 0.08 to 0.32% by mass. See para. 29. A content of water in the stripping solution is preferably from 1.0 to 80% by mass, and more preferably from 15 to 40% by mass. See para. 49. In order to allow the stripping solution according to the present invention to have a pH measured at 23° C. of not more than 6.0 or 8.5 or more, it may contain a pH adjuster. The kind ofthe pH adjuster is not limited within the range where the object of the present invention is not impaired as long as it is able to adjust the pH of the stripping solution to a desired value, and it can be appropriately selected among a variety of conventionally known pH adjusters. Suitable pH adjusters include citric acid, etc. See para. 50-53. Specifically, Ueno et al teach a composition to containing 0.11% hydrofluoric acid, 0.05% diethylenetriamine, 0.1% citric acid, 25.2% water, and 74.8% NMP, wherein the composition has a pH of 5.7. Ueno et al disclose the claimed invention with sufficient specificity to constitute anticipation.
Accordingly, the teachings of Ueno et al anticipate the material limitations of independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims.
Claims 1-3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kamimura (US2019/0194580).
With respect to independent, instant claim 1, Kamimura teaches a treatment liquid is a treatment liquid for a semiconductor device, which contains a fluorine-containing compound and a water-soluble aromatic compound not having a heterocyclic group but having a benzene ring, and has a pH of 5 or less. See Abstract. Suitable fluorine compounds include HF, ammonium fluoride, etc., which may be used in amounts 0.01% to about 10% by weight. See para. 79-85. The treatment liquid of the embodiment of the present invention preferably contains a corrosion inhibitor. The corrosion inhibitor is a compound other than the water-soluble aromatic compound. See para. 107. Suitable corrosion inhibitors include citric acid, etc. See para. 106-111. A content of the corrosion inhibitor in the treatment liquid is preferably 0.01% to 5% by mass, more preferably 0.05% to 5% by mass, and still more preferably 0.1% to 3% by mass, with respect to the total mass of the treatment liquid. See para. 125. A content of the water in the treatment liquid is preferably 50% by mass or more, more preferably 50% to 99% by mass, and still more preferably 60% to 95% by mass, with respect to the total mass of the treatment liquid. See para. 178. Specifically, Kamimura teaches 1.2% HF, 1.0% phenylphosphonic acid, 2.0% citric, water, etc., wherein the pH of the composition is 4.5. See para. 407-410. Kamimura discloses the claimed invention with sufficient specificity to constitute anticipation.
Accordingly, the teachings of Kamimura anticipate the material limitations of independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims.
Claims 4 and 5 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamimura (US2019/0194580).
Kamimura is relied upon as set forth above. However, Kamimura does not teach, with sufficient specificity, a composition containing citric acid or hydrofluoric acid in the specific amounts as recited by the instant claims.
Nonetheless it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to formulate a composition containing citric acid or hydrofluoric acid in the specific amounts as recited by the instant claims, with a reasonable expectation of success and similar results with respect to other disclosed components, because the broad teachings of Kamimura suggest a composition containing citric acid or hydrofluoric acid in the specific amounts as recited by the instant claims.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mizutani (US2019/0119571).
With respect to independent, instant claim 1, Mizutani teaches an etching composition (e.g., an etching composition for selectively removing tantalum and/or tantalum nitride) that includes a) hydrofluoric acid (HF); b) at least one first solvent, the first solvent being a carboxylic acid; c) at least one oxidizing agent; and d) at least one complexing agent selected from the group consisting of polycarboxylic acids and hydroxycarboxylic acids. See para. 15. In some embodiments, the hydrofluoric acid is in an amount of at least about 0.1 wt % (e.g., at least about 0.2 wt %, at least about 0.4 wt %, at least about 0.5 wt %, at least about 0.6 wt %, at least about 0.8 wt %, at least about 1 wt %, at least about 1.2 wt %, at least about 1.4 wt %, or at least about 1.5 wt %) to at most about 5 wt % (e.g., at most about 4.5 wt %, at most about 4 wt %, at most about 3.5 wt %, at most about 3 wt %, at most about 2.5 wt %, or at most about 2 wt %) of the etching composition of this disclosure. See para. 16. Suitable complexing agents include citric acid, etc., which may be used from at least about 0.1% by weight (e.g., at least about 0.2% by weight, at least about 0.4% by weight, at least about 0.5% by weight, at least about 0.6% by weight, at least about 0.8% by weight, at least about 1% by weight, at least about 1.5% by weight, at least about 2% by weight, etc., up to 10% by weight. See paras. 21-25. In some embodiments, the etching composition of this disclosure can have a pH of at most about 1 (e.g., at most about 0.9. at most about 0.8. at most about 0.7. at most about 0.6, or at most about 0.5). See para. 30. Specifically, Mizutani teaches a composition containing 1.5% hydrofluoric acid, 0.1% citric acid, 2.29% water, etc. Mizutani discloses the claimed invention with sufficient specificity to constitute anticipation.
Accordingly, the teachings of Mizutani anticipate the material limitations of independent, instant claim 1 and the respective dependent claims.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizutani (US2019/0119571).
Mizutani is relied upon as set forth above. However, Mizutan does not teach, with sufficient specificity, a composition containing the specific amount of hydrofluoric acid as recited by the instant claims.
Nonetheless it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to formulate a composition containing hydrofluoric acid in the specific amounts as recited by the instant claims, with a reasonable expectation of success and similar results with respect to other disclosed components, because the broad teachings of Kamimura suggest a composition containing hydrofluoric acid in the specific amounts as recited by the instant claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Remaining references cited but not relied upon are considered to be cumulative to or less pertinent than those relied upon or discussed above.
Applicant is reminded that any evidence to be presented in accordance with 37 CFR 1.131 or 1.132 should be submitted before final rejection in order to be considered timely.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY R DEL COTTO whose telephone number is (571)272-1312. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30am-6:00pm, 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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at (571) 272-2817. 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.
/GREGORY R DELCOTTO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
/G.R.D/January 7, 2016