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 .
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.
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.
Claims 1-7 and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nystrom (US 6152806) in view of Zhang et al. (US 8774958, "Zhang").
1. Nystrom teaches a chemical mechanical polishing (CMP) apparatus (100), comprising:
an inner platen (120) to support an inner polishing pad (126);
an annular outer platen (130) to support an outer polishing pad (136), wherein the outer polishing pad coaxially surrounds the inner platen (Nystrom fig. 2), and an outer edge (122) of the inner platen (120) and an inner edge (132) of the outer platen (130) are separated by a gap (50, Nystrom fig. 3);
a carrier head (any of 152a-125d, Nystrom fig. 1) to hold a substrate (160);
one or more motors (120b, Nystrom fig. 3) to rotate the inner platen about a vertical axis at a first rotation rate and to rotate the outer platen about the vertical axis at a second rotation rate (motors are capable of rotating the platens at different speeds or directions, Nystrom 4:11-20 and 5:63-6:17).
Nystrom further teaches that control parameters may include relative rotation speeds and directions of the inner platen and outer platen, and the location of the carrier head (Nystrom 5:63-6:17), and that polishing rates at different radial positions may be varied by modifying the control parameters (Nystrom figs. 11-15 and 6:18-7:26).
Nystrom does not teach the presence of a controller configured to select values for a plurality of control parameters to minimize a difference between a target removal profile and an expected removal profile, the plurality of control parameters including a first parameter representing a difference in rotational speeds between the inner and outer platens, wherein a relationship between the plurality of control parameters and a removal rate is stored in a data structure representing a first matrix which includes a plurality of columns including a column for the difference in rotational speeds and a row for each position on the substrate represented in the expected removal profile, and wherein the controller is configured to, as part of selection of the values, calculate the expected removal profile by multiplying the first matrix by a second matrix representing control parameter values.
However, Zhang teaches a CMP apparatus (100) including a platen (120) holding a pad (110), a carrier head (140) holding a substrate (10), a plurality of motors (121,154) capable of adjusting relative motion between carrier head and platen (Zhang fig. 1, 4:26-34, 5:1-9, and 15:36-50), and a controller (190) configured to control operation of the apparatus based on control parameters and a target removal profile (Zhang 2:12-16 and 7:41-8:3); wherein the controller is configured to select values for a plurality of control parameters to minimize a difference between a target removal profile and an expected removal profile (Zhang 10:18-48),
wherein a relationship between the plurality of control parameters and a removal rate is stored in a data structure representing a first matrix which includes a plurality of columns, each column representing a control parameter and a plurality of rows, each row representing a radial position on the substrate where the profile is measured (Zhang 8:51-10:4), and wherein the controller is configured to, as part of selection of the values, calculate the expected removal profile by multiplying the first matrix by a second matrix representing control parameter values (multiplying by control parameter value matrix P', Zhang 8:51-64).
Zhang further teaches that control parameters can include platen rotation rates and carrier head rotation rates (Zhang 2:27-3:50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to integrate the teachings from Zhang regarding controlling a CMP process using a matrix relating local removal rates to individual control parameters into the apparatus of Nystrom (which suggests the use of relative speeds of the inner and outer platen—i.e., a difference in rotational speeds between the inner and outer platen—as a control parameter) such that the apparatus as modified included a controller configured to select values for a plurality of control parameters to minimize a difference between a target removal profile and an expected removal profile, the plurality of control parameters including a first parameter representing a difference in rotational speeds between the inner and outer platens, wherein a relationship between the plurality of control parameters and a removal rate is stored in a data structure representing a first matrix which includes a plurality of columns including a column for the difference in rotational speeds and a row for each position on the substrate represented in the expected removal profile, and wherein the controller is configured to, as part of selection of the values, calculate the expected removal profile by multiplying the first matrix by a second matrix representing control parameter values, as doing so would result in reduced variation between wafers (Zhang 2:12-26).
Regarding claims 2 and 3, Nystrom as modified does not explicitly recite that the controller is configured to receive a first rotational speed for one of the inner or outer platens from a recipe that is stored prior to polishing and to calculate a second rotational speed for the other of the inner or outer platens from the first rotational speed and the difference in rotational speeds.
However, it has been held that “in considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom.” MPEP § 2144.01, citing In re Preda, 401 F.2d 825, 826, 159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968).
As noted in the rejection of claim 1, Nystrom as modified teaches that the controller configured to select values for a plurality of control parameters to minimize a difference between a target removal profile and an expected removal profile, the control parameters including relative speeds of the inner and outer platens.
Zhang further teaches that minimizing the difference between an expected removal profile and a target removal profile is performed via an iterative process of adjusting polish parameters (Zhang 10:18-48). The target removal profile being derived from a comparison of an initial surface profile with a target surface profile, where the initial surface profile may be a default value (Zhang 7:41-8:3) and the expected removal profile being generated based on a given set of process parameters (Zhang 8:4-7). Finally, Zhang teaches that holding all but one process parameter constant while varying the one may be used to simplify process parameter adjustment (Zhang 10:54-58). From these teachings, one of ordinary skill would infer that Nystrom as modified by Zhang implicitly suggests the possibility of setting all process parameters based on a default initial surface profile (i.e., a recipe), performing polishing with process parameters, and as polishing progresses, iteratively modifying the speed of at least one of the two platens as needed to counter divergences between an expected removal rate and a target removal rate (i.e., to counteract non-uniform polishing as suggested by Nystrom 2:64-3:11).
4. Nystrom as modified teaches the polishing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to apply a minimizing algorithm to reduce a difference between an expected thickness profile and a target thickness profile, wherein applying the minimizing algorithm includes iteratively calculating the expected removal profile using different values for the difference in rotational speeds (finding the control parameter settings to minimize differences using an iterative process, Zhang 10:18-48; difference in rotational speeds would be one of the control parameters of Nystrom as modified).
5. Nystrom as modified teaches the polishing apparatus of claim 1. Nystrom does not explicitly teach that the apparatus comprises an actuator, and wherein the carrier head is laterally movable by the actuator, but it does teach that the carrier heads are moved laterally in a predetermined path (Nystrom 4:7-10). Furthermore, although Nystrom does not explicitly disclose an actuator, one of ordinary skill would understand that the lateral motion must be driven by some sort of actuator, even if such driving was indirect.
Regarding claims 6 and 7, Nystrom as modified teaches the polishing apparatus of claim 5, wherein the controller is configured to cause the actuator to oscillate the carrier head between a first position and a second position. Specifically, Nystrom teaches that the carrier head may oscillate between two points (Nystrom figs. 6-8 and 5:33-43) and that the oscillation may be such that the center of the carrier head moves between two points on the inner pad (Nystrom fig. 6), two points on the outer pad (Nystrom fig. 7) or one point on each pad (Nystrom fig. 8).
Nystrom as modified does not teach that the substrate is entirely over one of the polishing pads in the first position and partially over both of the polishing pads in the second position.
However, Nystrom further teaches that the control parameters may include the sizes of the inner and outer platens (Nystrom 2:64-3:11). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill to modify the sizes of the inner and outer platens such that the substrate was entirely over one of the polishing pads in the first position and partially over both of the polishing pads in the second position, as doing so would enhance the ability to counter non-uniform polishing along the radii of a substrate (Nystrom 2:64-3:11).
Regarding claim 15-19, Nystrom as modified by Zhang teaches the apparatus of claims 1-4 and 7. It has been held that if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will inherently perform the claimed process. In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed. Cir. 1986). The apparatus of Nystrom as modified by Zhang described in claims 1-4 and 7 would necessarily perform the method of claims 15-19 in its normal and usual operation. Consequently, the method of claims 15-19 is unpatentable over the combination of Nystrom and Zhang cited in the rejection of claims 1-4 and 7, above.
Claims 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nystrom, Zhang and Leong et al. (US PGPub 2016/0114457, "Leong").
8. Nystrom teaches a chemical mechanical polishing (CMP) apparatus (100), comprising:
an inner platen (120) to support an inner polishing pad (126);
an annular outer platen (130) to support an outer polishing pad (136), wherein the outer polishing pad coaxially surrounds the inner platen (Nystrom fig. 2), and an outer edge (122) of the inner platen (120) and an inner edge (132) of the outer platen (130) are separated by a gap (50, Nystrom fig. 3);
a carrier head (any of 152a-125d, Nystrom fig. 1) to hold a substrate (160);
one or more motors (120b, Nystrom fig. 3) to rotate the inner platen about a vertical axis at a first rotation rate and to rotate the outer platen about the vertical axis at a second rotation rate (motors are capable of rotating the platens at different speeds or directions, Nystrom 4:11-20 and 5:63-6:17).
Nystrom does not explicitly teach that the apparatus comprises an actuator to move the carrier head laterally, but it does teach that the carrier heads are moved laterally in a predetermined path (Nystrom 4:7-10). Furthermore, although Nystrom does not explicitly disclose an actuator, one of ordinary skill would understand that the lateral motion must be driven by some sort of actuator, even if such driving was indirect.
Nystrom further teaches that the carrier head may oscillate between two points (Nystrom figs. 6-8 and 5:33-43) and that the oscillation may be such that the center of the carrier head moves between two points on the inner pad (Nystrom fig. 6), two points on the outer pad (Nystrom fig. 7) or one point on each pad (Nystrom fig. 8), that control parameters may include relative rotation speeds and directions of the inner platen and outer platen, the location of the carrier head, and the sizes of the inner and outer platens (Nystrom 2:64-3:11), and that polishing rates at different radial positions may be varied by modifying the control parameters (Nystrom figs. 11-15 and 6:18-7:26).
Nystrom does not explicitly disclose the presence of a controller configured to cause the actuator to sweep the carrier head laterally in accord with a sweep profile, wherein the controller is configured to select values for a plurality of control parameters to minimize a difference between a target removal profile and an expected removal profile, the plurality of control parameters including a plurality of dwell time parameters with each respective dwell time parameter of the plurality of dwell time parameters representing an amount of time for the carrier head to spend over a plurality of positions with at least one of the plurality of positions corresponding to substrate being positioned over just one of the inner and outer polishing pads and at least another of the plurality of positions corresponding to substrate being positioned over both the inner and outer polishing pads,
However, Leong teaches a polishing apparatus (300) having a polishing surface comprising regions exhibiting different removal rates (fixed abrasive pad 360 has polishing regions 364a-b and 365, Leong fig. 3b and [0030]-[0033]), and a carrier head (336) configured to be moved laterally between a plurality of positions (z1,z2) relative to regions (354a-b and 365, see Leong fig. 3c, [0021]-[0023], and [0035]) and wherein the apparatus includes a controller configured to adjust polishing parameters including sweep speed, sweep distance, and dwell time to produce a desired polishing profile (Leong [0036]-[0038] and [0041]).
In light of the teachings from Nystrom of varying the sizes of the platens, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to integrate the teachings from Leong of a controller configured to modify sweep speed, sweep distance, and dwell time to produce a desired polishing profile into the apparatus of Nystrom such that it included a controller configured to cause the actuator to sweep the carrier head laterally in accord with a sweep profile, wherein the controller is configured to select values for a plurality of control parameters, the plurality of control parameters including a plurality of dwell time parameters with each respective dwell time parameter of the plurality of dwell time parameters representing an amount of time for the carrier head to spend over a plurality of positions with at least one of the plurality of positions corresponding to substrate being positioned over just one of the inner and outer polishing pads and at least another of the plurality of positions corresponding to substrate being positioned over both the inner and outer polishing pads, as doing so would allow for adjustment in polishing rates without changing pressure, which increases the life of a pad (Leong [0041]).
Nystrom as modified does not teach that the controller is configured to select values for a plurality of control parameters to minimize a difference between a target removal profile and an expected removal profile, or that a relationship between the plurality of control parameters and a removal rate is stored in a data structure representing a first matrix which includes a plurality of columns including a column for each dwell time parameter and a row for each position on the substrate represented in the expected removal profile, and wherein the controller is configured to, as part of selection of the values, calculate the expected removal profile by multiplying the first matrix by a second matrix representing control parameter values.
However, Zhang teaches a CMP apparatus (100) including a platen (120) holding a pad (110), a carrier head (140) holding a substrate (10), a plurality of motors (121,154) capable of adjusting relative motion between carrier head and platen (Zhang fig. 1, 4:26-34, 5:1-9, and 15:36-50), and a controller (190) configured to control operation of the apparatus based on control parameters and a target removal profile (Zhang 2:12-16 and 7:41-8:3); wherein the controller is configured to select values for a plurality of control parameters to minimize a difference between a target removal profile and an expected removal profile (Zhang 10:18-48),
wherein a relationship between the plurality of control parameters and a removal rate is stored in a data structure representing a first matrix which includes a plurality of columns, each column representing a control parameter and a plurality of rows, each row representing a radial position on the substrate where the profile is measured (Zhang 8:51-10:4), and wherein the controller is configured to, as part of selection of the values, calculate the expected removal profile by multiplying the first matrix by a second matrix representing control parameter values (multiplying by control parameter value matrix P', Zhang 8:51-64).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to integrate the teachings from Zhang regarding controlling a CMP process using a matrix relating local removal rates to individual control parameters into the apparatus of Nystrom as modified such that it included a controller configured to select values for a plurality of control parameters to minimize a difference between a target removal profile and an expected removal profile and a relationship between the plurality of control parameters and a removal rate was stored in a data structure representing a first matrix which included a plurality of columns including a column for each dwell time parameter and a row for each position on the substrate represented in the expected removal profile, and wherein the controller was configured to, as part of selection of the values, calculate the expected removal profile by multiplying the first matrix by a second matrix representing control parameter values, as doing so would result in reduced variation between wafers (Zhang 2:12-26).
9. Nystrom as modified teaches the polishing apparatus of claim 8, wherein the controller is configured to calculate a sweep profile from values for the plurality of dwell time parameters (calculating a sweep profile based on dwell times, see Leong [0037]).
10. Nystrom as modified teaches the polishing apparatus of claim 9, wherein the controller is configured to set the sweep profile with a respective speed for each respective annular zone of a plurality of annular zones on each of the inner and outer platens. (sweep profile is adjusted to control dwell time in plurality of zones, see Leong [0035]-[0036], analogous zones in Nystrom would be annular because of the concentric platens)
11. Nystrom as modified teaches the polishing apparatus of claim 10, wherein the controller is configured to set the respective speed for each respective annular zone of the plurality of annular zones as a constant value within the respective annular zone (sweep speed may be constant, Leong [0023]).
12. Nystrom as modified teaches the polishing apparatus of claim 11, but does not explicitly teach that values for the plurality of dwell time parameters are in units of a fraction of total time. However, it would nonetheless have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify Nystrom as modified such that values for the plurality of dwell time parameters are in units of a fraction of total time, as the sole difference between the claimed invention and Nystrom as modified is a recitation of the relative dimensions of the claimed device, and it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). Further, the disclosure provides no evidence indicating the relative dimensions are critical to the invention.
Regarding claims 13 and 14, Nystrom as modified teaches the polishing apparatus of claim 10, and further teaches that the controller is configured to calculate a sweep speed for each respective annular zone of the plurality of annular zones as inversely proportional to the values for the plurality of the dwell time parameters for each respective annular zone (dwell time and sweep speed are, by definition, inversely proportional. The faster a carrier head sweeps, the less time it spends in any given zone), and a fractional dwell time value for the plurality of annular zones is proportional to an oscillation period of the sweep profile (similarly, dwell time and oscillation period are both functionally coupled to sweep speed insofar as a higher sweep speed will reduce both dwell time and oscillation period. The terms therefore are necessarily proportional).
Claims 20-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nystrom in view of Zhang as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Leong.
Regarding claims 20-23, Nystrom as modified teaches the method of claim 19,
and that the carrier head may oscillate between two points (Nystrom figs. 6-8 and 5:33-43) and that the oscillation may be such that the center of the carrier head moves between two points on the inner pad (Nystrom fig. 6), two points on the outer pad (Nystrom fig. 7) or one point on each pad (Nystrom fig. 8), that control parameters may include relative rotation speeds and directions of the inner platen and outer platen, the location of the carrier head, and the sizes of the inner and outer platens (Nystrom 2:64-3:11), and that polishing rates at different radial positions may be varied by modifying the control parameters (Nystrom figs. 11-15 and 6:18-7:26).
Nystrom as modified does not explicitly disclose that:
(19) the plurality of control parameters comprise a plurality of dwell time parameters representing an amount of time for the carrier head to spend over a plurality of positions with at least one of the plurality of positions corresponding to substrate being positioned over just one of the inner and outer polishing pad and at least another of the plurality of positions corresponding to substrate being positioned over both the inner and outer polishing pad, or that the method further comprises steps of
(21) calculating a sweep profile from values for the plurality of dwell time parameters;
(22) setting the sweep profile with a respective speed for each respective annular zone of a plurality of annular zones on each of the inner and outer platens; or
(23) setting the respective speed for each respective annular zone of the plurality of annular zones as a constant value within the respective annular zone.
However, Leong teaches a method for using a polishing apparatus (300) having a polishing surface comprising regions exhibiting different removal rates (fixed abrasive pad 360 has polishing regions 364a-b and 365, Leong fig. 3b and [0030]-[0033]), and a carrier head (336) configured to be moved laterally between a plurality of positions (z1,z2) relative to regions (354a-b and 365, see Leong fig. 3c, [0021]-[0023], and [0035]) in a polishing method (Leong [0004], wherein the method includes adjusts polishing parameters including sweep speed, sweep distance, and dwell time to produce a sweep profile associated with a desired polishing profile (Leong [0036]-[0038] and [0041]), and wherein the sweep speed may be constant (Leong [0023]).
In light of the teachings from Nystrom of varying the sizes of the platens, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to integrate the teachings from Leong of a controller configured to modify sweep speed, sweep distance, and dwell time to produce a desired polishing profile into the method of Nystrom as modified such that the plurality of control parameters comprised a plurality of dwell time parameters representing an amount of time for the carrier head to spend over a plurality of positions with at least one of the plurality of positions corresponding to substrate being positioned over just one of the inner and outer polishing pad and at least another of the plurality of positions corresponding to substrate being positioned over both the inner and outer polishing pad, and the method further comprised steps of calculating a sweep profile from values for the plurality of dwell time parameters; setting the sweep profile with a respective speed for each respective annular zone of a plurality of annular zones on each of the inner and outer platens; or setting the respective speed for each respective annular zone of the plurality of annular zones as a constant value within the respective annular zone, as doing so would allow for adjustment in polishing rates without changing pressure, which increases the life of a pad (Leong [0041]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN R ZAWORSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-7804. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00-5:00, Fridays 9:00-1:00.
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, Monica Carter can be reached at (571)-272-4475. 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.
/J.R.Z./ Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/MONICA S CARTER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723