DETAILED ACTION
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 § 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.
Claim(s) 21-40, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U. S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0035247 (hereinafter referred to as Tan) in view of Korean Patent Publication No. 102287507 (hereinafter referred to as KR ‘507).
Tan, in the abstract, [0006], [0009], [0014] discloses a multilayer structure and a method of fabricating a semiconductor device, the multilayer device includes a substrate with a film stack (multiple layers that include the claimed lower layer), and an underlayer (claimed underlayer) that is underlying the imaging layer (claimed resist film) such that the imaging layer (resist layer/film) is formed over the underlayer. Tan, in [0147]-[0163], discloses that the underlayer and the imaging layer can be a film that is a radiation sensitive film and one that is crosslinked by radiation wherein the radiation sensitive film that constitutes the film includes both the underlayer film and the overlying resist film (imaging layer), and the film composition (both underlayer and the resist film) includes metal-containing precursor, wherein the metal includes Sn (tin), and includes Sn-O-Sn linkages and further includes ligands and R groups bonded to the metal (Sn) wherein the R group can be alkyl and Tan in [0185], discloses that the precursor includes hydroxyl groups i.e., the underlayer compositional components includes precursors that comprise alkyl metal (Sn) oxo hydroxo groups and is the same as the claimed alkylated tin-oxo nanoclusters (see figure 2E, including the starting material). Tan in [0037], discloses that the resist film (imaging layer) can be tin oxide hydroxide-based photoresist material and Tan, in [0214], discloses that the organometallic coating is an agglomerated polymeric material that includes M-O-M bonds (claims 21-23, and 29). Tan, in [0201], [0232], [0240], discloses that the resist layer (imaging layer) is exposed and developed to form a mask wherein the unexposed regions are removed (for negative tone resist) while the underlying layers are not developed away i.e., the solubility of the underlayer in the developer solvent is less than that of the overlying imaging (photoresist) layer (claim 24). Tan, in [0089]-[0091], and [0145]-[0164], discloses that the underlayer include components (same EUV resist components i.e., alkyl tin oxo hydroxo material) that result in the formation of crosslinked material in portions of the underlayer due to exposure to EUV, and that crosslinking includes bonds formed via Sn wherein the Sn bonds with the ligands are broken and the Sn migrate/diffuse to the corresponding underlying underlayer portions and form bonds in the exposed regions (crosslinked regions) and is the same as the claimed crosslinked alkylated tin oxo-hydroxo nano clusters (agglomerated polymerized regions) formed in the underlayer such that crosslinking occurs not only in the exposed part of the resist layer but also with the underlying underlayer portions, and the corresponding overlying exposed regions (claimed first part) of the resist film (imaging layer), whereas the imaging layer that is not exposed (for negative tone resist) remains the same composition i.e., alkyl tin oxo hydroxo material of the EUV resist and is the same as the claimed second part of the resist film (imaging film), and Tan, in [0090], [0147], [0240], and [0242], discloses that the exposed and unexposed part of the photoresist (imaging layer) are different such that the exposed part if cross-linked and for a negative tone resist, the exposed part remains after the developing process using an organic solvent, whereas the unexposed part is soluble in the developer and is removed by the organic solvent (negative tone developer) i.e., the solubility of the exposed part and the corresponding underlying exposed underlayer in the organic solvent developer is smaller than the unexposed portions (claims 25-28, 36-39). Tan, in the abstract, and in [0143], discloses that the underlayer is formed on a substrate with layers already formed on the substrate (lower layer, stack etc.). Tan, in [0147]-[0148], discloses that the underlayer includes the same components as the EUV resist layer components, wherein the EUV resist components are alkyl tin oxo hydroxo components (see [0037], and [0149]-[0163]) and is the same components for the underlayer that constitutes the film formed on the substrate layer, and exposing the film formed (film is the underlayer alone or the underlayer and imaging layer) to radiation (EUV or DUV) and is the same claimed thin film treatment process performed on the underlayer. Tan, in [0146], [0205], and [0211], discloses that the underlayer and the resist film (imaging layer, EUV resist) can be formed on the substrate (with layers already formed on the substrate) by a spin-coating technique or a dry deposition technique such as CVD such that the EUV resist film or the imaging layer is formed on the underlayer such that both the EUV resist imaging layer and the underlying underlayer have the same components viz., organometallic resist such as alkyl tin oxo hydroxo resist, wherein the alkyl is the same as that claimed (see [0167]), and Tan, in [0209], [0214]-[0218], discloses that the EUV sensitive organometallic oxide material coated is agglomerated polymeric (cluster or cage) (claims 30-35, and 40).
The difference between the claims and Tan is that Tan does not disclose that the alkylated tin oxo hydroxo based photoresist that constitutes both the layers of the film i.e., underlayer and the overlying imaging EUV resist layer is the claimed formula 1 recited that has the tin oxo hydroxo group as the cation and the sulfonate as the counter anion.
KR ‘507, in the Problem Solving means section, and in the method of forming the pattern, and on pages 22, 29-30, discloses that the photoresist layer is formed on a underlying hardmask layer as the underlayer formed on the substrate, wherein the hardmask underlayer has the formula A, and is the same claimed alkyl tin oxo hydroxo cage structure, and discloses that the cluster compound is an ionic compound such as a cation, and that the counter ion of the compound is an anion and is alkyl benzene sulfonate.
Therefore, it would be obvious to a skilled artisan to modify Tan by including the cluster compound structure disclosed by KR ‘507 as the agglomerated alkyl tin oxo hydroxo type photoresist of Tan because both Tan and KR ‘507 teach organometal material as the underlayer film and both Tan and KR ‘507 teach the compound being a cluster/cage with oxo and hydroxo bonds and Tan teaches that the underlayer film or the resist film that constitutes the film that is EUV sensitive (see [0146]-[0147]) can include hydrocarbon precursors that include aromatic compounds ([0118], and [0122]) as high EUV absorbing atoms in the composition that form/constitute the layers (film) on the substrate and Tan, in [0354] –[0355], discloses that the aromatic groups include aromatic with aliphatic substitutions such as alkyl groups and hetero substitutions such as sulfonate, and KR ‘507, discloses that the using the claimed cluster compound enables better etch selectivity and ease of removal in subsequent etching processes (post development processes).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daborah Chacko-Davis whose telephone number is (571) 272-1380. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:30AM-6:00PM EST Mon-Fri. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sally A. Merkling can be reached on (571) 272-6297. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-272-8300. 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.
/DABORAH CHACKO-DAVIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737 August 22, 2026.
Prosecution Insights