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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on September 6, 2023 was filed before the mailing of a first Office action on the merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because reference characters A’ and 18 are shown in figures 10 and 11 without the corresponding elements being shown. The examiner notes the reference A’ is used to denote a line where a cross section is taken, however, a line where a cross section is taken is not shown in figures 10 and 11. The examiner notes that reference character 18 refers to a cap metal layer, however, a cap metal layer is not shown in figures 10 and 11. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the content of the abstract is a nearly word for word repeat of independent claim 1. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the specification does not describe the subject matter shown in figure 1. The specification recites, “The barrier metal layer 16 is provided between the copper layer 14 and the cover insulating film 20,” in paragraph 41 on page 6. The examiner notes that figure 1 shows the cap metal layer 18 is provided between the copper layer and the cover insulating film 20.
Appropriate correction is required.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the specification does not describe the subject matter shown in figure 13. The specification recites, “Thereafter, the upper wiring layers 24 and the second interlayer insulating layer 22 are formed on the cover insulating film 20 using a known process technique,” in paragraph 41 on page 6. The examiner notes that figure 13 shows the upper wiring layers 24 and the second interlayer insulating layer 22 are formed on the capacitor insulating layer 70.
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.
Claim 9 is 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 9 recites the Markush Group “containing silicon nitride, silicon carbide, or silicon carbonitride,” on page 2 lines 21-22. The Markush Group renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what elements are included in the Markush Group. The examiner first notes that, “Although the term "Markush claim" is used throughout the MPEP, any claim that recites alternatively usable members, regardless of format, should be treated as a Markush claim.” See MPEP § 2117 I. The examiner next notes that limitations in the body of claim 9 are introduced by an open-ended transitional phrase because the limitations in the body of claim 9 are preceded “comprising,” and thus, the Markush Group includes additional unrecited elements. The examiner now notes that “If a Markush grouping requires a material selected from an open list of alternatives (e.g., selected from the group ‘comprising’ or ‘consisting essentially of’ the recited alternatives), the claim should generally be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as indefinite because it is unclear what other alternatives are intended to be encompassed by the claim.” See MPEP § 2173.05(h) I.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-7, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Coolbaugh et al. (US 6,876,028).
Regarding Claim 1:
Coolbaugh discloses a semiconductor device comprising: a copper layer (copper core conductor, See fig. 1A, ref. no. 110, fig. 4B, ref. no. 328A, col. 2 lines 41-62, and col. 4 lines 50-62) having a lower surface (bottom surface of copper core conductor, See fig. 4B, ref. no. 328A), an upper surface (top surface of copper core conductor, See fig. 4B, ref. no. 328A), a first side surface (left surface of copper core conductor, See fig. 4B, ref. no. 328A), and a second side surface (right surface of copper core conductor, See fig. 4B, ref. no. 328A), a first distance between the first side surface and the second side surface being larger than a second distance between the lower surface and the upper surface (the distance between the left surface and the right surface of the copper core conductor is larger than the distance between the top surface and the bottom surface of the copper core conductor, See fig. 4B, ref. no. 328A); a first metal layer (conductive liner, See fig. 1A, ref. no. 115, fig. 4B, ref. no. 330A, col. 2 lines 41-67, col. 3 lines 1-10, and col. 4 lines 50-62) in contact with the lower surface, the first side surface, and the second side surface and containing a first metal material (Ta or TaN, See col. 2 lines 63-64) different from copper; and a second metal layer (conductive diffusion barrier, See fig. 1A, ref. no. 120, fig. 4B, ref. no. 332A, col. 2 lines 58-67, col. 3 lines 1-10, col. 4 lines 63-67, and col. 5 lines 1-4) in contact with the upper surface and containing a second metal material (W, WN, Ta, TaN, See col. 2 lines 64-67 and col. 3 line 1) different from copper.
Regarding Claim 2:
Coolbaugh discloses wherein the copper layer is surrounded by the first metal layer and the second metal layer in a cross section including the lower surface, the upper surface, the first side surface, and the second side surface (the copper core conductor is surrounded by the conductive liner and the conductive diffusion barrier, See fig. 4B, ref. nos. 326A, 328A, 332A and col. 4 lines 50-52).
Regarding Claim 4:
Coolbaugh discloses wherein a Young's modulus of the second metal material is larger than a Young's modulus of copper material (W, WN, Ta, TaN, See col. 2 lines 64-67 and col. 3 line 1. The examiner notes that the Young’s moduli of W, WN, Ta, and TaN are larger than a Young’s modulus of copper.).
Regarding Claim 5:
Coolbaugh discloses wherein the first metal material and the second metal material are same metal material (a Ta conductive liner and a Ta conductive diffusion barrier are the same metal material and a TaN conductive liner and a TaN conductive diffusion barrier are the same metal material, See col. 2 lines 63-67 and col. 3 line 1)
Regarding Claim 6:
Coolbaugh discloses wherein the first metal material includes at least one material selected from the group consisting of tantalum (Ta, See col. 2 lines 63-64), tantalum nitride (TaN, See col. 2 lines 63-64), titanium, titanium nitride, tungsten, tungsten nitride, and titanium tungsten.
Regarding Claim 7:
Coolbaugh discloses wherein the second metal material includes at least one material selected from the group consisting of tantalum (Ta, See col. 2 lines 64-67 and col. 3 line 1), tantalum nitride (TaN, See col. 2 lines 64-67 and col. 3 line 1), titanium, titanium nitride, tungsten (W, See col. 2 lines 64-67 and col. 3 line 1), tungsten nitride (WN, See col. 2 lines 64-67 and col. 3 line 1), and titanium tungsten.
Regarding Claim 9:
Coolbaugh discloses an insulating film (MIM dielectric, See fig. 1A, ref. no. 130, figs. 4C-4E, ref. no. 336, col. 2 lines 45-62, col. 3 lines 1-5, and col. 5 lines 5-21) provided on the second metal layer and containing silicon nitride (Si3N4, See col. 3 lines 1-5), silicon carbide (SiC, See col. 3 lines 1-5), or silicon carbonitride.
Regarding Claim 10:
Coolbaugh discloses a capacitor insulating film (MIM dielectric, See fig. 1A, ref. no. 130, figs. 4C-4E, ref. no. 336, col. 2 lines 45-62, col. 3 lines 1-5, and col. 5 lines 5-21) provided on the second metal layer; and a capacitor upper electrode (tri-layer top electrode, See fig. 1A ref. no. 140, figs. 4C-4E, ref. no. 338, col. 2 lines 45-62, and col. 5 lines 5-21) provided on the capacitor insulating film, wherein the copper layer is a capacitor lower electrode (bottom electrode, See fig. 1A, ref. no. 105, figs. 4A-4E, ref. no. 326A, col. 2 lines 41-62, and col. 4 lines 50-62).
Claims 1-2 and 4-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (US 6,207,552).
Regarding Claim 1:
Wang discloses a semiconductor device comprising: a copper layer (copper interconnect, See figs. 7-8, ref. no. 208, col. 2 lines 51-67 and col. 3 lines 1-25) having a lower surface (bottom surface of copper interconnect, See figs. 7-8, ref. no. 208), an upper surface (top surface of copper interconnect, See figs. 7-8, ref. no. 208), a first side surface (left surface of copper interconnect, See figs. 7-8, ref. no. 208), and a second side surface (right surface of copper interconnect, See figs. 7-8, ref. no. 208), a first distance between the first side surface and the second side surface being larger than a second distance between the lower surface and the upper surface (the distance between the left surface and the right surface of the copper interconnect is larger than the distance between the top surface and the bottom surface of the copper interconnect, See figs. 7-8, ref. no. 208); a first metal layer (first diffusion barrier material, See figs. 7-8, ref. no. 210, col. 2 lines 51-67, and col. 3 lines 1-12) in contact with the lower surface, the first side surface, and the second side surface and containing a first metal material (TiN or TaN, See col. 5 lines 2-5 and 44-47) different from copper; and a second metal layer (second diffusion barrier material, See figs. 7-8, ref. no. 230, col. 5 lines 1-5 and 25-35) in contact with the upper surface and containing a second metal material (TiN or TaN, See col. 5 44-47) different from copper.
Regarding Claim 2:
Wang discloses wherein the copper layer is surrounded by the first metal layer and the second metal layer in a cross section including the lower surface, the upper surface, the first side surface, and the second side surface (the copper interconnect is surrounded by the first diffusion barrier material and the second diffusion barrier material, See figs. 7-8, ref. nos. 208, 210, 230, and col. 4 lines 50-52).
Regarding Claim 4:
Wang discloses wherein a Young's modulus of the second metal material is larger than a Young's modulus of copper material (TiN or TaN, See col. 5 44-47. The examiner notes that the Young’s moduli of TiN and TaN are larger than a Young’s modulus of copper.).
Regarding Claim 5:
Wang discloses wherein the first metal material and the second metal material are same metal material (the second diffusion barrier material may be the same as the first diffusion barrier material, See col. 5 lines 2-5).
Regarding Claim 6:
Wang discloses wherein the first metal material includes at least one material selected from the group consisting of tantalum, tantalum nitride (TaN, See col. 5 lines 2-5 and 44-47), titanium, titanium nitride (TiN See col. 5 lines 2-5 and 44-47), tungsten, tungsten nitride, and titanium tungsten.
Regarding Claim 7:
Wang discloses wherein the second metal material includes at least one material selected from the group consisting of tantalum, tantalum nitride (TaN, See col. 5 lines 44-47), titanium, titanium nitride (TiN, See col. 5 lines 44-47), tungsten, tungsten nitride, and titanium tungsten.
Regarding Claim 8:
Wang discloses wherein a thickness of a central portion of the second metal layer is larger than a thickness of both end portions in a cross section including the lower surface, the upper surface, the first side surface, and the second side surface (the top surface of the second diffusion barrier material has a flat shape and the bottom surface of the second diffusion barrier material has a concave shape, thus, the second diffusion barrier material has a thickness of a central portion larger than a thickness of both end portions when viewed in a cross-sectional view, See figs. 7-8, ref. no. 230 and col. 5 lines 26-36).
Regarding Claim 9:
Wang discloses an insulating film (encapsulating layer, See fig. 8, ref. no. 240 and col. 5 lines 36-45) provided on the second metal layer and containing silicon nitride (silicon nitride, See col. 5 lines 36-45), silicon carbide, or silicon carbonitride.
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coolbaugh et al. (US 6,876,028) in view of Takahashi et al. (US 2020/0091078).
Regarding Claim 3:
Coolbaugh discloses the above stated semiconductor device. (The examiner notes that the bottom electrode of the MIM capacitor also serves as an electrical wiring connection to the MIM capacitor. See figs. 1A, 1B, ref. no. 105, fig. 4D, ref. no. 326A, col. 3 lines 21-22. col. 4 lines 50-62).
Coolbaugh does not disclose wherein the second distance is equal to or more than 2 µm.
Takahashi discloses wherein the second distance is equal to or more than 2 µm (the film thickness of the first copper wiring is equal to or more than 5 µm and equal to or less than 20 µm, See fig. 1, ref. nos. t1, 16a, and paragraph 22).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the semiconductor device of Coolbaugh to include wherein the second distance is equal to or more than 2 µm as taught by Takahashi in order to reduce resistance of the wiring by using thick metal wiring. (See Takahashi paragraph 33 and 46).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 6,207,552) in view of Takahashi et al. (US 2020/0091078).
Regarding Claim 3:
Wang discloses the above stated semiconductor device.
Wang does not disclose wherein the second distance is equal to or more than 2 µm.
Takahashi discloses wherein the second distance is equal to or more than 2 µm (the film thickness of the first copper wiring is equal to or more than 5 µm and equal to or less than 20 µm, See fig. 1, ref. nos. t1, 16a, and paragraph 22).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the semiconductor device of Wang to include wherein the second distance is equal to or more than 2 µm as taught by Takahashi in order to reduce resistance of the lines by using thick metal lines. (See Takahashi paragraph 33 and 46).
Claims 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasegawa et al. (US 5,793,112) in view of Takahashi et al. (US 2020/0091078).
Regarding Claim 11:
Hasegawa discloses a method for manufacturing a semiconductor device, the method comprising:
forming a recess (trench, See fig.1, fig. 2(a), ref. no. 12, col. 5 lines 8-17, and 33-36) having a width larger than a depth in an insulating layer (the width of the trench in the first insulating layer is larger than the depth of the trench in the first insulating layer, See fig. 1, fig. 2(a), ref. nos. 2, 12, col. 5 lines 8-17 and 33-36);
forming a first metal film in the recess (depositing TiN layer in the trench, See fig. 2(b) and col 5 lines 37-40);
embedding the recess with a copper film (embedding the first conductive layer in the trench, See fig. 2(b), fig. 2(c), ref. no. 4, col. 5 lines 8-17 and 33-48) ;
removing the copper film and the first metal film on the insulating layer by polishing the copper film and the first metal film by a chemical mechanical polishing method (polishing the TiN layer and the first conductive layer, See fig. 2(c), ref. nos. 3, 4, and col 5 lines 41-48);
forming a second metal film on the copper film (depositing TiWN layer, See fig. 2(d) and col. 6 lines 6-8); and
removing the second metal film on the insulating layer and leaving the second metal film on the copper film by polishing the second metal film by a chemical mechanical polishing method (polishing the TiWN layer, See fig. 2(e) and col. 6 lines 9-20).
Hasegawa does not disclose the recess has a depth of equal to or more than 2 µm.
Takahashi discloses a film thickness of the first copper wiring is equal to or more than 5 µm and equal to or less than 20 µm (See fig. 1, ref. nos. t1, 16a, and paragraph 22).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for manufacturing a semiconductor device of Hasegawa to etch the trench in the first insulating layer to a depth equal to or more than 5 µm and equal to or less than 20 µm in order to form copper wiring having a thickness equal to or more than 5 µm and equal to or less than 20 µm taught by Takahashi to reduce resistance of the wiring by using thick metal wiring. (See Takahashi paragraph 33 and 46).
Regarding Claim 12:
Hasegawa discloses removing a part of the copper film before the forming the second metal film and after the removing the copper film and the first metal film on the insulating layer (forming a recess in the first conductive layer by overetching a top surface of the first conductive layer, See fig. 2(c), ref. nos. 4, 5, and col 5 lines 41-48).
Regarding Claim 13:
Hasegawa disclosed forming a first insulating film on the second metal film at a film formation temperature of equal to or more than 250 °C after the removing the second metal film on the insulating layer (forming a second insulating layer by a plasma-CVD method at a high temperature 300° to 400°, See fig. 2(f), ref. no. 7 and col. 6 lines 45-51).
Claims 11-12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coolbaugh et al. (US 6,876,028) in view of Takahashi et al. (US 2020/0091078).
Regarding Claim 11:
Coolbaugh discloses a method for manufacturing a semiconductor device, the method comprising:
forming a recess (trench in interlevel dielectric, See fig. 4A, ref. no. 320 and col. 3 lines 41-59 and col. 4 lines 50-62. The examiner notes that the trench in the interlevel dielectric is shown in figure 4A with the copper core conductor and the conductor liner in the trench. See fig. 4A, ref. nos. 320, 328A, and 330A) having a width larger than a depth in an insulating layer (the width of the trench containing the copper core conductor and the conductive liner is larger than the depth of the trench containing the copper core conductor and the conductive liner, See fig. 4A, ref. nos. 320, 328A, and 330A);
forming a first metal film in the recess (depositing a conductive liner, See col. 3 lines 41-59 and col. 4 lines 50-62, the conductive liner can be Ta or TaN or combination thereof, See col. 2 lines 63-64 and col. 3 lines 47-48);
embedding the recess with a copper film (depositing a copper seed layer and copper plating to fill the trench, See col. 3 lines 49-59 and col. 4 lines 50-62) ;
removing the copper film and the first metal film on the insulating layer by polishing the copper film and the first metal film by a chemical mechanical polishing method (performing a chemical-mechanical-polish to co-planarize the top surfaces of the cooper, the conductive line, and the interlevel dielectric See col. 3 lines 49-59 and col. 4 lines 50-62); (The examiner notes that the bottom electrode of the MIM capacitor also serves as an electrical wiring connection to the MIM capacitor. See figs. 1A, 1B, ref. no. 105, fig. 4D, ref. no. 326A, col. 3 lines 21-22. col. 4 lines 50-62).
forming a second metal film on the copper film (depositing a conductive diffusion barrier, See col. 4 lines 63-67 and col. 5 lines 1-4, the conductive diffusion barrier can W, WN, Ta, TaN, See col. 2 lines 64-67, col. 3 line 1, and col. 4 lines 57-58); and
removing the second metal film on the insulating layer and leaving the second metal film on the copper film by polishing the second metal film by a chemical mechanical polishing method (CMP process to form recessed conductive diffusion barrier, See fig. 4B, ref. no. 332A col. 4 lines 63-67 and col. 5 lines 1-4).
Coolbaugh does not disclose the recess has a depth of equal to or more than 2 µm.
Takahashi discloses a film thickness of the first copper wiring is equal to or more than 5 µm and equal to or less than 20 µm (See fig. 1, ref. nos. t1, 16a, and paragraph 22).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for manufacturing a semiconductor device of Coolbaugh to etch the trench in the interlevel dielectric to a depth equal to or more than 5 µm and equal to or less than 20 µm in order to form copper wiring having a thickness equal to or more than 5 µm and equal to or less than 20 µm taught by Takahashi to reduce resistance of the wiring by using thick metal wiring. (See Takahashi paragraph 33 and 46
Regarding Claim 12:
Coolbaugh discloses removing a part of the copper film before the forming the second metal film and after the removing the copper film and the first metal film on the insulating layer (copper core conductor is recessed before depositing conductive diffusion barrier level, See col. 4 lines 63-67 and col. 5 lines 1-4).
Regarding Claim 14:
Coolbaugh discloses forming a capacitor insulating film on the second metal film after the removing the second metal film on the insulating layer and leaving the second metal film on the copper film (forming MIM dielectric, See fig. 4C, ref. no. 336 and col. 5 lines 5-21); and forming a capacitor upper electrode on the capacitor insulating film (forming tri-layer top electrode, See fig. 4C, ref. no. 338 and col. 5 lines 5-21).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRETT SQUIRES whose telephone number is (571)272-8214. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00am-5:30pm.
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, Dale Page can be reached at 571-270-7877. 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.
/B.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2899 /DALE E PAGE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2899