DETAILED ACTION
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Claims 1-21 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/12/2026.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 7-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PARK et al. (US 2019/0152996) in view of MAES et al. (US 2021/0358745).
Regarding claims 1-4, 7-10, 12-14, and 19
PARK teaches a lanthanum compound for atomic layer deposition (cyclic vapor deposition) [0037].
PNG
media_image1.png
150
248
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The compound shows the use of two cyclopentadienyl ligands and a acetamindinato bidentate ligand (heteroleptic). The R1 on the cyclopentadienyl (Cp) group is H or a C1-C4 linear/branched alkyl group (substituent) [0006]. The reactive gas for deposition onto a substrate is oxygen or oxygen containing gas such as ozone , water and hydrogen peroxide [0082]-[0083]. The substrate is in a reaction chamber [0077].
PARK teaches the deposition of lanthanum oxide using the claimed precursors but does not teach the selective deposition of the metal oxide on a first surface relative to a second surface. However, MAES teaches a method for selective deposition that includes a metallic surface and dielectric surface abstract. The selective deposition can occur onto the dielectric using a passivation layer on the metal as shown in Figs. 1A-D. The metal can be a conductive metal such as copper [0076]. The dielectric layer can be an inorganic dielectric such as a silicon oxide [0077]. The deposited material can be lanthanum oxide [0011] and [0083]. At the time of filing the invention it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to selectively deposit lanthanum oxide onto a dielectric to improve insulating characteristics in integrated circuits.
Regarding claim 5,
PARK teaches using silicon oxide as a dielectric. Silicon is a semi-metal and is considered to fall within the scope of a metal using the broadest reasonable interpretation of metal.
Regarding claim 11,
MAES teaches using a passivation layer on the metal while depositing on the dielectric. The passivation process is further shown in Fig. 13 which includes a pre-treatment step of both dielectric and metal surfaces. The pretreatment is an exposure to silicon reactant (silylation agent) [0196]. Then the inhibitor is applied where the inhibitor can be polyimide (organic polymer) [0200]. The clean up step then exposes the dielectric surface for selective deposition.
Regarding claim 15-17,
The R2-4 groups connected to the acetamidinato ligand can be hydrogen or a linear/branched alkyl group C1-C5 or C1-C4 [0006]. The scope of the generic structure therefore includes two alkyl groups and a hydrogen (dialkyl-).
Regarding claim 18,
The R1 on the cyclopentadienyl (Cp) group can be a branched C3 alkyl group (isopropyl) [0006] and there are two monodentate Cp ligands. The R2 and R3 on the acetaminidinato group can both be C3 branched alkyl group (isopropyl) [0006]. The resulting compound corresponds to the claimed langhanum precursor. The PARK reference does not expressly teach an embodiment using the claimed lanthanum compound. However, at the time of filing the invention it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select R groups according to the instructions provided in PARK and consequently arrive at the claimed compound.
Regarding claim 20,
PARK teaches the oxygen containing reactive gas can be a combination of (different) gases including oxygen, ozone, water, and hydrogen peroxide [0083].
Regarding claim 21,
PARK teaches the thickness of the deposited layer is controlled by the number of ALD cycles [0135]. The deposition speed can be 0.01nm/min [0134]. The reference does not expressly teach the thickness of the deposited lanthanum oxide layer. However, at the time of filing the invention it would have been prima facie obvious to deposit the lanthanum oxide to whatever thickness is required for their particular specifications.
Claim(s) 5 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PARK et al. (US 2019/0152996) in view of MAES et al. (US 2021/0358745) further in view of FORBES (US 2005/0275011).
Regarding claims 5 and 6,
PARK teaches depositing the lanthanum onto an inorganic dielectric but only mentions the use of silicon oxide [0077]. However, FORBES teaches that when using dielectric layers, a silicon dioxide dielectric can be improved by a nanolaminate structure of other inorganic dielectric materials abstract. The FORBES reference teaches other known inorganic dielectric layers [0026] used in the art and also shows that they can be used as surface material for lanthanum oxide ALD [0028]. At the time of filing the invention it would have been prima facie obvious to use additional dielectric material such as HfO2 and ZrO2 as dielectric material as a simple substitution of known inorganic dielectric materials onto which lanthanum oxide can be deposited by ALD.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AUSTIN MURATA whose telephone number is (571)270-5596. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5.
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, MICHAEL CLEVELAND can be reached at 571272-1418. 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.
/AUSTIN MURATA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712
Prosecution Insights