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 Acknowledged
Applicant’s election, without traverse, of Invention I directed to a method, cancellation of device Claims 17-20, and addition of new method Claims 21-24 in the response to Restriction Requirements filed 02/10/26 has been acknowledged.
Together with the response and the new set of claims, Applicant submitted replacement sheets with Figs. 15A-15C, 16, 17, and 24A-24C.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-16 and 21-24 are examined on merits herein.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “112” in Fig. 1 has been used to designate both a fin and a plug. 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. 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.
Fig. 6B is objected to since a sidewall of dielectric 180 in Fig. 6B shall be shown as 180SB’, not as 180SA’ (see Figs. 5B and 6B and paragraph 0031 related to “pushing”).
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph 0016 of the published application (US 2025/0112087) identifies element with number 112 as a fin, but paragraphs 0021 and 0033 identify an element with number 112 as a plug. Please, be reminded that in figures of the application, a contact plug is also identified as CP – compare Figs. 7 showing exposed contact plug CP with paragraph 0033 of the published application stating that “contact plugs 112” are exposed.
Paragraph 0034 of the published application is directed to creation of “metal lines” using metals, metal oxides, or metal nitrides, but lines created from metal nitrides or metal oxides are not “metal lines” – they are just conductive (or – metallic) lines (if a metal oxide is conductive). Please, note that references to “metal lines” are made in some other paragraphs following paragraph 0034.
Paragraph 0041, referring to Figs. 10, states that sidewalls 250SA are exposed by opening O1, but in reality, these sidewalls are exposed by opening O2. In addition, paragraph 0041 refers to exposed openings in dielectric layer 180, but Figs. 10 show that dielectric 180 is not exposed.
Paragraphs 0049-0050 identify elements 270 as metal features, but state that these features may be created not only from a metal, but also from a metal nitride.
Appropriate corrections/clarifications are required.
Claim Objection
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informality:
Line 3 of Claim 8 recites: “prior to etching the first dielectric layer”. However, Claim 8 depends on Claim 1 that does not recite a step of “etching the first dielectric layer”, but recites only deposition of the first dielectric layer, while Claim 2 recites: “etching the first dielectric layer”. In view of the above, the Examiner suggests that it is more logical to make Claim 8 dependent on Claim 2 than on Claim 1.
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.
Claims 1-16 and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
In re Claim 1: Claim 1 recites in line 4: “etching a trench opening in the second dielectric layer”, then recites in lines 10-12: “forming a via etch stop layer on the first sidewall of the second dielectric layer, wherein the second sidewall of the second dielectric layer is free from coverage by the via etch stop layer” and then recites in line 13: “forming a conductive line in the trench opening”. A problem with the recitation in line 13 is that its trench opening is not the same as a trench opening in line 4, but smaller at least by a double thickness of a via etch stop layer, as clarified below with the reference to Figs. 2C and 7C of the application: Annotated Fig. 2C below shows initially created trench opening O1, and Annotated Fig. 7C shows opening O1 extending into the first dielectric 170 (in which a conductive line is created in a further step). Figs. 2C and 7C clearly show that two openings differ from each other by a double width of the via etch stop layer 204A (even though both openings are shown by a same letter O1, which is incorrect).
Annotated Fig. 2C
PNG
media_image1.png
194
253
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 7C
PNG
media_image2.png
183
214
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Since a conductive line is created in an opening of Fig. 7C, the recitation of line 13 lacks an antecedent basis – the opening in Fig. 7C differs from the trench opening of Fig. 2C, and the reference to a trench opening in line 13 cannot use an article “the” in the claim as filed.
. Appropriate correction is required to clarify the claim language.
Considering that claims dependent on Claim 1 (e.g. Claims 2 and 8-10) recite: “trench opening”, but actually refer not to initially created trench opening, but to a narrower opening, which walls are surrounded by a via etch stop layer 204A, the claim language shall be clarified.
For this Office Action: the recitation of line 4 is interpreted as: “etching a hole in the second dielectric layer”, a recitation of lines 10-12 is interpreted as: “forming a via etch stop layer on the first sidewall of the second dielectric layer, wherein the second sidewall of the second dielectric layer is free from coverage by the via etch stop layer, creating by that a trench opening surrounded by the via etch stop layer”; in view of the above interpretations, the recitation of line 13 is interpreted as filed.
In re Claims 2-10: Claims 2-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) due to dependency on Claim 1.
In re Claim 11: Claim 11 has same problems with “a trench opening”, as Claim 1, and for this Office Action, corresponding limitations of Claim 11 were interpreted similar to related interpretations of Claim 1.
In re Claims 12-16: Claims 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) due to dependency on Claim 11.
In re Claim 21: Claim 21 has same problems with “a trench opening”, as Claim 1, and for this Office Action, corresponding limitations of Claims 21 are interpreted similar to related interpretations of Claim 1.
In re Claims 22-24: Claims 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) due to dependency on Claim 21.
Allowable Subject Matter
Independent Claims 1, 11, and 21, as interpreted, contain allowable subject matter.
Reason for Indicating Allowable Subject Matter
Re Claim 1: Each of prior arts of record - Hsueh et al. (US 2023/0060269) and Ho et al. (US 2019/0035734) – teaches most limitations of Claim 1 (as interpreted), but does not teach such limitation as: “the second sidewall of the second dielectric layer is free from coverage by the via etch stop layer”, in combination with such limitations as: “forming a via etch stop layer on the first sidewall of the second dielectric layer”, and: “first sidewall of the second dielectric layer extends substantially along a first direction, and the second sidewall of the second dielectric layer extends substantially along a second direction different from the first direction in a top view” and in combination with other limitations of Claim 1.
Singh et al. (US 10,347,528) teaches a method creating a first sidewall of a trench covered with a via etch stop layer, while a second sidewall is partially free from coverage by the via etch stop layer, but Claim 1 recites not “partial”, but “a full sidewall” free of the coverage; in addition, Singh does not teach a top view of the structure, also claimed by Claim 1.
Other prior arts of record, including Mignot et al. (US 11,101.175), Tsai et al. (US 2021/0082821), and Mrunal Abhijith et al. (US 2021/0225762) - do not cure the above deficiency.
Re Claim 11: Although such prior arts of record as Lee et al. (US 2006/0040485), Zeng et al. (US 9,135,930), or Lau et al. (US 5,266,529) teach a directional ion beam etching process tilted with respect to a direction normal to a substrate (as required for Claim 11), none of these prior art can be reasonably combined with the above-cited Hsueh, Ho, Singh, Mignot, Tsai, and/or Mrunal Abhijith (teaching some other limitations of Claim 11) to come up with such limitation as: “a sidewall of the hard mask layer and a sidewall of the second dielectric layer are exposed by the etch stop layer after the first directional ion beam process”.
Re Claim 21: The above-cited prior arts of record, alone or in combination, fail(s) to anticipate or render obvious such limitations as: “a second sidewall of the second dielectric layer is free from coverage by the first via stop layer”, in combination with other limitations of the claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to GALINA G YUSHINA whose telephone number is 571-270-7440. The Examiner can normally be reached between 8 AM - 7 PM Pacific Time (Flexible).
Examiner interviews are available. 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, Lynne Gurley can be reached on 571-272-1670.
The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300; a fax phone number of Galina Yushina is 571-270-8440.
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 visit 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.
/GALINA G YUSHINA/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2811, TC 2800,
United States Patent and Trademark Office
E-mail: galina.yushina@USPTO.gov
Phone: 571-270-7440
Date: 02/25/26