DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-15) in the reply filed on 11/03/2025 is acknowledged.
3. Claims 16-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/03/2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. 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.
5. Claims 12-13 are 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 12 recites the limitation "the second reaction chamber" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear whether “the second reaction chamber” is referred to “a second chamber” or not.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the second reaction chamber" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear whether “the second reaction chamber” is referred to “a second chamber” or not.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
7. 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.
8. Claims 1, 3-7, 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Su et al. (US 2021/0134595 A1).
As to claim 1, Su discloses a method of forming a mandrel, the method comprising
providing a substrate (201) to a reaction chamber, the substrate comprising a material layer;
the substrate further comprising a structure, the structure comprising a distal portion (202), a proximal portion (top surface 220), and two substantially parallel sidewalls (See Fig 8, paragraph 0049-0056)
and carrying out a plurality of etching cycles, ones from the plurality of etching cycles comprising subsequently executing a conversion pulse and a volatilization pulse, wherein:
the conversion pulse comprises exposing the substrate to a conversion reactant, thereby forming a converted surface layer on the sidewalls (paragraph 0064-0071, Fig 18); and
the volatilization pulse comprises exposing the substrate to a volatilization reactant, thereby volatilizing the converted surface layer, thereby thinning the structure to form a mandrel (paragraph 0072-0086, Fig 18).
As to claim 3, Su discloses wherein the distal portion comprises a distal layer (202), the distal layer overlying the material layer (201); the proximal portion of the structure comprises a proximal layer (top surface 220); and the structure further comprising a core layer (210), the core layer (210) being positioned between the distal layer (202) and the proximal layer (top surface 220), two edges of the core layer forming the sidewalls (See Fig 8-9, paragraph 0049-0057).
As to claim 4, Su discloses wherein the distal layer (202) and the proximal layer (220) have a first composition (such as silicon oxide or silicon nitride; See paragraph 0050, 0056), wherein the core layer (210) has a second composition, wherein the first composition and the second composition are different (silicon oxide or silicon nitride (first composition) vs. amorphous silicon (second composition); See paragraph 0050, 0054, 0056).
As to claim 5, Su discloses the distal (202) and the proximal layer (220) substantially consisting of silicon oxide (paragraph 0050, 0056) and the core layer (210) substantially consisting of amorphous silicon (paragraph 054).
As to claim 6, Su discloses the conversion reactant comprises an oxygen reactant (paragraph 0066).
As to claim 7, Su discloses the oxygen reactant is selected from O2 (paragraph 0066).
As to claim 11, Su discloses a distance between the distal portion (top surface 220) and the proximal portion (202) is greater than the distance between the two substantially parallel sidewalls (i.e. width of core layer 210) (See Fig 8).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Su et al. (US 2021/0134595 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of LaVoie et al. (US 2018/0308695 A1).
As to claim 2, Su discloses the etching cycles are repeated until a predetermined thickness of the structure has been removed from the sidewalls (paragraph 0075). As to claim 3, Su fails to disclose the predetermined thickness being from at least 1 nm to at most 10 nm. LaVoie discloses the etching cycles are repeated until a predetermined thickness of the structure has been removed from the sidewalls, wherein the predetermined thickness is between 0.1 nm to 50 nm, or 0.1 nm to 5 nm or 0.2 nm to 5 nm (paragraph 0048; Note: 5 nm is within applicant’s range of at least 1 nm to at most 10 nm). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Su in view of LaVoie by having a predetermined thickness of 5 nm because in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (See MPEP 2144.05(I)).
12. Claims 8-10, 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Su et al. (US 2021/0134595 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tan (US 2017/0229314 A1).
As to claim 8, Su fails to disclose the volatilization reactant comprises a fluorine species. However, Su clearly teaches to use volatilization reactant to remove the modified or passivation layer (paragraph 0075-0077). Tan teaches to remove the modification layer using fluorine species (paragraph 0060, 0106). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Su in view of Tan by using fluorine species because equivalent and substitution of one for the other would produce an expected result (See MPEP 2143(I)(B)).
As to claim 9, Su teaches to volatilization species are generated using a plasma (paragraph 00760078). As to claim 9, Su fails to teaches the fluorine species are generated using a plasma. Tan teaches fluorine species are generated using plasma to remove modified layer (paragraph 0060, 0106). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Su in view of Tan by generating fluorine species into a plasma because equivalent and substitution of one for the other would produce an expected result (See MPEP 2143(I)(B)).
As to claim 10, Su fails to disclose the fluorine species is selected from fluorine radical, fluoride ion, F2, HF and NF3. Tan discloses fluorine species is selected from fluorine (F2) and NF3 (nitrogen trifluoride) (See 0053, 0061, 0072, 0106). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Su in view of Tan by having fluorine species are selected from F2 and NF3 because equivalent and substitution of one for the other would produce an expected result (See MPEP 2143(I)(B)).
As to claim 12, Su discloses forming a mandrel on the substrate in the first reaction chamber by the method according to claim 1. Su fails to disclose a system comprises a first reaction chamber and a second chamber; providing a substrate to the second reaction chamber while keeping the substrate in a vacuum or while keeping the substrate in an inert gas and forming an etchable layer on the substrate in the second reaction chamber. Tan discloses a system comprises a first reaction chamber and a second chamber; providing a substrate to the second reaction chamber while keeping the substrate in a vacuum and forming an etchable layer on the substrate in the second reaction chamber (Fig 1A; Fig 5, paragraph 0014, 0026, 0035, 0106, 0109, 0119-0124). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Su in view of Tan by having a system comprises a first reaction chamber and a second chamber; providing a substrate to the second reaction chamber while keeping the substrate in a vacuum and forming an etchable layer on the substrate in the second reaction chamber because using plurality of chambers to perform different steps are well known in the art in order to reduce processing time.
Allowable Subject Matter
13. Claim 13 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
14. Claims 14-15 allowed.
15. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As to claim 13, the cited prior arts fail to disclose or suggest etching the etchable layer by a directional etch; and selectively etching the mandrel vis-à-vis the etchable layer and the material layer, thereby forming the spacer in combination with all other limitations in the claim.
As to claim 14, the cited prior arts fail to disclose or suggest etching the patternable layer in one of the exposed areas and the unexposed areas, thereby forming a plurality of structures on the substrate; removing the photosensitive layer from the substrate; forming a plurality of spacers on the substrate by the method according to claim 1; and selectively etching the patternable layer vis-à-vis the plurality of spacers, thereby forming a patterned layer on the substrate in combination with all other limitations in the claim.
As to claim 15, the cited prior arts fail to disclose or suggest forming a plurality of mandrels on the substrate by the method according to claim 1; and selectively etching the patternable layer vis-à-vis the plurality of mandrels, thereby forming a patterned layer on the substrate in combination with all other limitations in the claim.
Conclusion
16. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BINH X TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1469. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Joshua Allen can be reached at 571-270-3176. 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.
BINH X. TRAN
Examiner
Art Unit 1713
/BINH X TRAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713