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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Fig. 3 shows a portion of layer 112 impacted by the ions but the claims require that the second layer 112 is not impacted by the ions (i.e. “wherein the ions impact the third layer without impacting the second layer”). 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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(s) 1-6, 8-13 and 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. US 9,252,019 in view of Kim et al. US 2018/0219010.
Regarding claim 1, Tsai et al. discloses a method, comprising:
depositing a plurality of layers over a plurality of device structures, the plurality of layers comprising a first layer 111 over the plurality of device structures, a second layer 113 over the first layer 111, and a third layer 115 over the second layer 113, Fig. 1;
forming a plurality of contact trenches 201 through the plurality of layers to expose one or more device structures of the plurality of device structures Fig. 2.
Tsai et al. does not expressly disclose providing a plurality of trenches in a substrate, the plurality of trenches defining a plurality of device structures;
directing ions into a sidewall of the plurality of contact trenches at a non-zero angle relative to a perpendicular extending from a top surface of the plurality of layers, wherein the ions impact the third layer without impacting the second layer; and
forming a fill material within the plurality of contact trenches after the ions are directed into the sidewall of the plurality of contact trenches.
Kim et al. teaches a method of forming an integrated circuit device with improved integration of adjacent contact plugs which includes forming a plurality of trenches 112 in a substrate 110, the plurality of trenches defining a plurality of device structures;
directing ions [0120] into a sidewall of a plurality of contact trenches CH1U at a non-zero angle relative to a perpendicular extending from a top surface of a plurality of layers Fig. 8I, wherein the ions impact the third layer without impacting the second layer; and
forming a fill material 240 within the plurality of contact trenches CH1U after the ions are directed into the sidewall of the plurality of contact trenches Fig. 8L.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Kim et al. in the method of Tsai et al. for the purpose of improving the integration and performance of the device.
Regarding claim 2, Tsai et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the method of claim 1. Kim et al. teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising
forming the fill material 240 beyond the top surface of a plurality of layers; and
planarizing the fill material Figs. 8L and 8M.
Regarding claim 3, Tsai et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the method of claim 1. Tsai et al. teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising forming a fourth layer 117 over the third layer 115 of the plurality of layers.
Although Tsai et al. does not disclose wherein the fourth layer 117 and the first layer 111 are a same material, the material differences are considered obvious design choices and are not patentable unless obvious or unexpected results are obtained from these changes. It appears that these changes produce no functional differences and therefore would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention. See MPEP 2144.07.
Regarding claim 4, Tsai et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the method of claim 1. Kim et al. [0120] and Fig. 8I teaches directing ions into the sidewall of the plurality of contact trenches to form a passivation layer along the sidewall of the plurality of contact trenches, wherein the passivation layer 382D is formed over a plurality of layers (e.g. the fourth layer and the third layer without being formed over the second layer or the first layer, and wherein the passivation layer 382D retards growth of the fill material along the third layer (i.e. the layer 240 is in direct contact with 382D in the upper region of the contact hole and direct contact with the lower region of the contact hole).
Regarding claim 5, Tsai et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the method of claim 3. Tsai et al. teaches the method of claim 3, wherein the first layer 111 is an oxide material (e.g. oxynitride), wherein the second layer 113 is a silicon nitride layer, and wherein the fourth layer 117 is the oxide material col. 3, line 55-col. 4, line 40.
Although Tsai et al. does not disclose wherein the third layer 115 is a polysilicon layer, the material differences are considered obvious design choices and are not patentable unless obvious or unexpected results are obtained from these changes. It appears that these changes produce no functional differences and therefore would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention. See MPEP 2144.07.
Regarding claim 6, Tsai et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the method of claim 1. Kim et al. teaches wherein the fill material 240 is formed directly atop the one or more device structures of the plurality of device structures Fig. 8M.
Regarding claim 8, Tsai et al. discloses a method of forming a semiconductor device, the method comprising:
depositing a plurality of layers over a plurality of device structures, the plurality of layers comprising a first layer 111 over the plurality of device structures, a second layer 113 atop the first layer 111, and a third layer 115 atop the second layer 113, Fig. 1;
forming a plurality of contact trenches 201 through the plurality of layers to expose one or more device structures of the plurality of device structures Fig. 2.
Tsai et al. does not expressly disclose forming a (STI) material over a plurality of trenches in a substrate, the plurality of trenches defining a plurality of device structures;
directing ions into a sidewall of the plurality of contact trenches at a non-zero angle relative to a perpendicular extending from a top surface of the plurality of layers, wherein the ions impact the third layer without impacting the second layer; and
forming a fill material within the plurality of contact trenches after the ions are directed into the sidewall of the plurality of contact trenches.
Kim et al. teaches a method of forming an integrated circuit device with improved integration of adjacent contact plugs which includes forming a source-trench-isolation (STI) material 112 over a plurality of trenches in a substrate 110, the plurality of trenches defining a plurality of device structures;
directing ions [0120] into a sidewall of a plurality of contact trenches CH1U at a non-zero angle relative to a perpendicular extending from a top surface of a plurality of layers Fig. 8I, wherein the ions impact the third layer without impacting the second layer; and
forming a fill material 240 within the plurality of contact trenches CH1U after the ions are directed into the sidewall of the plurality of contact trenches Fig. 8L.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Kim et al. in the method of Tsai et al. for the purpose of improving the integration and performance of the device.
Regarding claim 9, Tsai et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the method of claim 8. Kim et al. teaches the method of claim 8, further comprising:
forming the fill material 240 over the top surface of the plurality of layers Fig. 8L; and
planarizing the fill material 240 to the top surface of the plurality of layers Fig. 8M.
Regarding claim 10, Tsai et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the method of claim 8. Tsai et al. teaches the method of claim 8, further comprising forming a fourth layer 117 over the third layer 115 of the plurality of layers.
Although Tsai et al. does not disclose wherein the fourth layer 117 and the first layer 111 are a same material, the material differences are considered obvious design choices and are not patentable unless obvious or unexpected results are obtained from these changes. It appears that these changes produce no functional differences and therefore would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention. See MPEP 2144.07.
Regarding claim 11, Tsai et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the method of claim 8. Kim et al. [0120] and Fig. 8I teaches directing ions into the sidewall of the plurality of contact trenches to form a passivation layer along the sidewall of the plurality of contact trenches, wherein the passivation layer 382D is formed over a plurality of layers (e.g. the fourth layer and the third layer without being formed over the second layer or the first layer, and wherein the passivation layer 382D retards growth of the fill material along the third layer (i.e. the layer 240 is in direct contact with 382D in the upper region of the contact hole and direct contact with the lower region of the contact hole).
Regarding claim 12, Tsai et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the method of claim 10. Tsai et al. teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the first layer 111 is an oxide material (e.g. oxynitride), wherein the second layer 113 is a silicon nitride layer, and wherein the fourth layer 117 is the oxide material col. 3, line 55-col. 4, line 40.
Although Tsai et al. does not disclose wherein the third layer 115 is a polysilicon layer, the material differences are considered obvious design choices and are not patentable unless obvious or unexpected results are obtained from these changes. It appears that these changes produce no functional differences and therefore would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention. See MPEP 2144.07.
Regarding claim 13, Tsai et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the method of claim 8. Kim et al. teaches wherein the fill material 240 is formed directly atop the one or more device structures of the plurality of device structures Fig. 8M.
Regarding claim 15, Tsai et al. discloses a method of forming a semiconductor device, comprising:
depositing a plurality of layers over a plurality of device structures, the plurality of layers comprising a first layer 111 over the plurality of device structures, a second layer 113 over the first layer 111, and a third layer 115 over the second layer 113, Fig. 1;
forming a plurality of contact trenches 201 through the plurality of layers to expose one or more device structures of the plurality of device structures Fig. 2, forming a passivation layer 301 along a sidewall of the plurality of contact trenches 201, Figs. 3A-3B.
Tsai et al. does not expressly disclose providing a plurality of trenches in a substrate, the plurality of trenches defining a plurality of device structures;
forming a passivation layer along a sidewall of the plurality of contact trenches by directing ions into the sidewall of the plurality of contact trenches at a non-zero angle relative to a perpendicular extending from a top surface of the plurality of layers, wherein the ions impact the third layer without impacting the second layer; and
forming a fill material within the plurality of contact trenches after the ions are directed into the sidewall of the plurality of contact trenches.
Kim et al. teaches a method of forming an integrated circuit device with improved integration of adjacent contact plugs which includes forming a plurality of trenches 112 in a substrate 110, the plurality of trenches defining a plurality of device structures; forming a passivation layer 382D along a sidewall of the plurality of contact trenches by CH1U directing ions [0120] into a sidewall of a plurality of contact trenches CH1U at a non-zero angle relative to a perpendicular extending from a top surface of a plurality of layers Fig. 8I, wherein the ions impact the third layer without impacting the second layer; and
forming a fill material 240 within the plurality of contact trenches CH1U after the ions are directed into the sidewall of the plurality of contact trenches Fig. 8L.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Kim et al. in the method of Tsai et al. for the purpose of improving the integration and performance of the device.
Regarding claim 16, Tsai et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the method of claim 15. Tsai et al. teaches the method of claim 15, further comprising forming a fourth layer 117 over the third layer 115 of the plurality of layers.
Although Tsai et al. does not disclose wherein the fourth layer 117 and the first layer 111 are a same material, the material differences are considered obvious design choices and are not patentable unless obvious or unexpected results are obtained from these changes. It appears that these changes produce no functional differences and therefore would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention. See MPEP 2144.07.
Regarding claim 17, Tsai et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the method of claim 1. Kim et al. teaches wherein the passivation layer 382D is formed over only the fourth layer and the third layer, and wherein the passivation layer 382D retards growth of the fill material along the third layer (i.e. the layer 240 is in direct contact with 382D in the upper region of the contact hole and direct contact with the lower region of the contact hole).
Regarding claim 18, Tsai et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the method of claim 16. Tsai et al. teaches the method of claim 16, wherein the first layer 111 is an oxide material (e.g. oxynitride), wherein the second layer 113 is a silicon nitride layer, and wherein the fourth layer 117 is the oxide material col. 3, line 55-col. 4, line 40.
Although Tsai et al. does not disclose wherein the third layer 115 is a polysilicon layer, the material differences are considered obvious design choices and are not patentable unless obvious or unexpected results are obtained from these changes. It appears that these changes produce no functional differences and therefore would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention. See MPEP 2144.07.
Regarding claim 19, Tsai et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the method of claim 16. Kim et al. teaches wherein the fill material 240 is formed directly atop the one or more device structures of the plurality of device structures Fig. 8M.
Claim(s) 7, 14 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. and Kim et al. as applied to claims 1, 8 and 15 above, and further in view of Lee et al. US 2007/0085207.
Regarding claim 7, Tsai et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the method of claim 1. Kim et al. teaches wherein forming the fill material 240 within the plurality of contact trenches comprises forming a metal layer [0123]-[0125] but does not expressly teach epitaxially growing a polysilicon within the plurality of contact trenches.
Lee et al. teaches a method of forming an semiconductor device including a contact comprising a polysilicon, metal or a metal nitride. It has been held that the substitution of one prior art teaching by another prior art supports an obviousness rejection, as in the instant case, the equivalency is being recognized in the prior art, and the substitution is then within the level of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.06.II.
Regarding claim 14, Tsai et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the method of claim 8. Kim et al. teaches wherein forming the fill material 240 within the plurality of contact trenches comprises forming a metal layer [0123]-[0125] but does not expressly teach epitaxially growing a polysilicon within the plurality of contact trenches.
Lee et al. teaches a method of forming an semiconductor device including a contact comprising a polysilicon, metal or a metal nitride [0062]-[0063]. It has been held that the substitution of one prior art teaching by another prior art supports an obviousness rejection, as in the instant case, the equivalency is being recognized in the prior art, and the substitution is then within the level of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.06.II.
Regarding claim 20, Tsai et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the method of claim 16. Kim et al. teaches wherein forming the fill material 240 within the plurality of contact trenches but does not teach the forming comprises epitaxially growing a polysilicon within the plurality of contact trenches, and wherein retarding epitaxial growth of the polysilicon along the third layer relative to along the second layer prevents formation of a void within the fill material after the fill material reach the top surface of the plurality of layers.
Lee et al. teaches a method of forming an semiconductor device including a contact comprising a polysilicon, metal or a metal nitride. It has been held that the substitution of one prior art teaching by another prior art supports an obviousness rejection, as in the instant case, the equivalency is being recognized in the prior art, and the substitution is then within the level of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.06.II.
Furthermore, wherein retarding epitaxial growth of the polysilicon along the third layer relative to along the second layer prevents formation of a void within the fill material after the fill material reach the top surface of the plurality of layers, is drawn to a method of use or a device under test. The intended use and other types of functional language must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In re Casey,152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963). In this case the structure is capable of performing this use.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SONYA D MCCALL-SHEPARD whose telephone number is (571)272-9801. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:30 AM-5:00 PM.
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, Julio J. Maldonado can be reached at (571)272-1864. 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.
/Sonya McCall-Shepard/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2898