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 1-16) in the reply filed on 10/09/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 17-20 are cancelled by the applicants in the response filed on 10/09/2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
3. 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.
4. Claims 1-16 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.
In line 1 of claim 1, the phrase “high aspect ratio etching” (emphasis added) is subjective, vague and indefinite. It is unclear from the claim which specific range of aspect ratio that applicants considered as “high aspect ratio”.
In line 1 of claim 7, the phrase “high aspect ratio contact” (emphasis added) is subjective, vague and indefinite. It is unclear from the claim which specific range of aspect ratio that applicants considered as “high aspect ratio”.
In line 1 of claim91, the phrase “high aspect ratio dielectric etching” (emphasis added) is subjective, vague and indefinite. It is unclear from the claim which specific range of aspect ratio that applicants considered as “high aspect ratio”.
Claims 2-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph because they directly or indirectly depend on indefinite claim 1.
Claims 10-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph because they directly or indirectly depend on indefinite claim 9.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
5. 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.
6. 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)(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.
7. Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Shoeb et al. (US 2025/0259821 A1).
Note: Independent claim number is in bold.
As to claim 1, Shoeb discloses a method for high aspect ratio etching (Fig 8A-8B, paragraph 0032), the method comprising:
generating a plasma in a plasma etching chamber containing a substrate comprising a patterned surface; and etching one or more underlying layers through openings in the patterned surface by coupling a periodic sequence comprising direct current (DC) bias waveforms to the substrate, each of the DC bias waveforms including a non-vertical voltage transition and voltage ranging from a reference voltage (VR1 and/or VR2) to a negative peak voltage, the periodic sequence having a duty cycle between 50% to 75 % (Fig 3, Fig 4, Fig 8A-8B, paragraph 0032-0034, 038, 0052-0064, 0057, 0070, Note: Duty cycle of 50% to 75% is within applicant’s range of “greater than 20%”).
As to 2, Shoeb discloses the periodic sequence is couple to the substrate with a frequency between 50 kHz to 500 kHz and wherein the negative peak voltage is negative voltage with the magnitude of 100 kV or 2 kV to 10 kV (paragraph 0044, 0064, Fig 3; Note: 500 kHz is within applicant’s range of between about 100 kHz and about 3 MHz). Therefore, Shoeb discloses a negative peak voltage of – 100 kV, or -2kV or -10 kV (Note: -100 kV or -10 kV is within applicant’s range of “less than or equal to about -7 kV”).
As to claim 3, Shoeb discloses the duty cycle is between 50% to 75% (paragraph 0057, 0064, 0070, 0121; Shoeb’s claim 5; Note: 50% to 75% is within applicant’s range of “greater than about 50% and less than 80%).
As to claim 4, Shoeb discloses the non-vertical transition is substantially linear (Fig 3).
As to claim 5, Shoeb discloses the DC bias waveforms comprises a sawtooth waveform or a triangular waveform, or rectangular waveform (Fig 3-Fig 5).
As to claim 6, Shoeb discloses the patterned surface is a patterned hardmask (804) surface (Fig 8A-8B, paragraph 0079).
As to claim 7, Shoeb discloses the method is a high aspect ratio contact etching process, the one of more underlaying layers comprises dielectric layer (paragraph 0024, 0027, 0032, 0078-0079).
As to claim 8, Shoeb discloses wherein the DC bias waveforms each have a first waveform shape and, wherein periodic sequence further comprises additional DC bias waveform, each having a second waveform shape that is different from the first waveform shape (See Fig 3).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. Claims 9-11, 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shoeb et al. (US 2025/0259821 A1) in view of Ventzek (US 2022/0059358 A1).
Note:
As to claim 9, Shoeb discloses a method for high aspect ratio dielectric etching, the method comprising:
generating a plasma in a plasma etching chamber containing a substrate comprising a hardmask (804) overlying a dielectric by applying a radio frequency (RF) signal (106) to a source power coupling element (Fig 1, Fig 8A-8B; paragraph 0042, 0051, 0079-0080)
etching the dielectric through openings in the hardmask to form features having an aspect ratio of greater than 20:1 kHz and about 3 MHz), each of the DC bias waveforms having voltage ranging from a reference voltage (VR1 or VR2) to a negative peak voltage about -100 kV or -10 kV, the periodic sequence having a duty cycle is between 50 % to 75% (Fig 3, Fig 4, Fig 8A-8B, paragraph 0032-0034, 038, 0052-0064, 0057, 0070, Note: Duty cycle of 50-75% is within applicant’s range of “greater than 20%”).
As to claim 9, Shoeb fails to disclose the feature having an aspect ratio of at least about 100:1. However, Shoeb clearly discloses feature having an aspect ratio greater than 20:1 (See paragraph 0032). Ventzek discloses the etched feature having an aspect ratio of at least about 100:1 (paragraph 0030). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Shoeb in view of Ventzek by having the feature with an aspect ratio of at least about 100:1 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)).
As to claim 10, Shoeb discloses the duty cycle is between 50% to 75% (paragraph 0057, 0064, 0070, 0121; Shoeb’s claim 5; Note: 50% to 75% is within applicant’s range of “greater than about 50% and less than 80%”).
As to claim 11, Shoeb discloses the DC bias waveforms comprises a sawtooth waveform or a triangular waveform, or rectangular waveform (Fig 3-Fig 6).
As to claim 14, Shoeb discloses wherein the DC bias waveforms each have a first waveform shape and, wherein periodic sequence further comprises additional DC bias waveform, each having a second waveform shape that is different from the first waveform shape (See Fig 3-6).
As to claim 15, Shoeb discloses the first waveform is a sawtooth waveform shape and the second waveform is a rectangular waveform shape (See Fig 3, Fig 6).
As to claim 16, Shoeb discloses the negative peak voltage of the DC bias waveform is varied during the periodic sequence (See Fig 3-Fig 6).
11. Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shoeb et al. (US 2025/0259821 A1) in view of Ventzek et al. (US 2022/0059358 A1) as applied to claims 9-11, 14-16 above, and further in view of Kumar (US 2007/0072435 A1)
As to claim 12, Shoeb and Ventzek fail to disclose the opening comprising a critical dimension less than 100 nm. However, Shoeb clearly discloses the opening comprises a mask having critical dimension (See Fig 8A-8B; Note: critical dimension is the width of the opening). Kumar discloses the opening comprises a mask having critical dimension of 45 nm range (paragraph 0037, within applicant’s range of “less than about 100 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 Shoeb and Ventzek in view of Kumar by having an opening with critical dimension of 45 nm range 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)).
As to claim 13, Shoeb and Ventzek fail to disclose the hardmask comprises an amorphous carbon layer (ALC) or tungsten silicide (WSi) layer. However, Shoeb clearly teaches to use a hardmask (804) comprises dielectric material (See Fig 8A-8B, paragraph 0079). Kumar teaches to use hardmask (308) comprises dielectric amorphous carbon layer (paragraph 0036-0038, Fig 3B-3D). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Shoeb and Ventzek in view of Kumar by using the hardmask comprises amorphous carbon layer because equivalent and substitution of one for the other would produce an expected result (See MPEP 2143(I)(B)).
Conclusion
12. 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
Prosecution Insights