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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/03/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
3 This office action is responsive to applicant’s amendment filed on 03/03/2026. Claims 1-17 are pending. Claim 1 is amended. Claim 17 is withdrawn-currently amended.
The applicant’s amendment fails to overcome the examiner previous ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C 112(b). Further, applicant’s amendment recites contradicted limitation “b) supplying a gas mixture to the surface, thereby etching the silicon oxide film and a silicon nitride film” vs. “wherein a time period for one execution of b)…. Such than the silicon oxide film is selectively etched without etching the silicon nitride film”. It is unclear whether the silicon nitride film is etched in step b) (as recited in line 5 of claim 1) or the silicon nitride is NOT etched in step b) (as recited in line 10-11 of claim 1).
Thus, the examiner still maintains the previous ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C 112(b).
Response to Arguments
3. Regarding to previous ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C 112(b), the applicants stated:
“By the foregoing amendments, claim 1 is amended to more particularly point out and distinctly claim their subject matter. Support for claim 1 can be found at paragraph [0062] of this application.
Accordingly, withdrawal of the rejection is respectfully requested.”
The examiner disagrees. In previous office action, the examiner clearly point out that it is unclear whether an etching delay of the silicon oxide film occurs in step (b) or in step (c), or both step (b) and (c), or in another step after step (b) and (c). The examiner further states that it is unclear whether an etching delay of the silicon nitride film occurs in step (b) or in step (c), or both step (b) and (c), or in another step after step (b) and (c). Applicants fail to address which specific step(s) when the etching delay of silicon oxide and etching delay of silicon nitride layer occur. Further, the limitation “wherein a time period for one execution of b) is … shorter than an etching delay of the silicon nitride film” means that the etching delay of the silicon nitride is longer than a time period for one execution of b). Therefore, it is NOT possible for an etching delay of the silicon nitride film occurs only in step b) alone. Etching delay of silicon nitride must extend beyond the time period of execution of step b) because etching delay of silicon nitride is longer than the time period for execution of step b).
Further, in line 4 of claim 1, the applicants recite “b) supplying a gas mixture to the surface, thereby etching the silicon oxide film and a silicon nitride film” (emphasis added). However, in line 9-11 of claim 1, the applicants recite limitation “wherein a time period for one execution of b) is longer than an etching delay of the silicon oxide film and shorter than an etching delay of the silicon nitride film, such that the silicon oxide film is selectively etched without etching the silicon nitride film” which contradicted to previous limitation “b) supplying a gas mixture to the surface, thereby etching the silicon oxide film and a silicon nitride film”. Once the applicants recites that thereby etching a silicon nitride film” in step b), applicants cannot recite that “the silicon oxide film is selectively etched without etching the silicon nitride film” in step b). It is unclear whether the silicon nitride film is etched in step b) (as recited in line 5 of claim 1) or the silicon nitride is NOT etched in step b) (as recited in line 10-11 of claim 1).
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 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 10-11 of claim 1, the applicants recites “wherein a time period for one execution of b) is longer than an etching delay of the silicon oxide film and shorter than an etching delay of the silicon nitride film.” (emphasis added). However, applicants fail to explicitly disclose when etching delay of the silicon oxide film or an etching delay of the silicon nitride film occurs. It is unclear whether an etching delay of the silicon oxide film occurs in step (b) or in step (c), or in both step (b) and (c), or in another step after step (b) and (c). It is unclear whether an etching delay of the silicon nitride film occurs in step (b) or in step (c), or in both step (b) and (c), or in another step after step (b) and (c). Further, the limitation “wherein a time period for one execution of b) is … shorter than an etching delay of the silicon nitride film” means that the etching delay of the silicon nitride is longer than a time period for one execution of b). Therefore, it is NOT possible for an etching delay of the silicon nitride film occurs only in step b) alone. Etching delay of silicon nitride must extend beyond step b) because etching delay of silicon nitride is longer than the time period for execution of step b).
In line 4 of claim 1, the applicants recite “b) supplying a gas mixture to the surface, thereby etching the silicon oxide film and a silicon nitride film,” (emphasis added). The examiner interprets this limitation means that etching both the silicon oxide film and a silicon nitride film occurs in step b). However, in line 9-11 of claim 1, the applicants recite limitation “wherein a time period for one execution of b) is longer than an etching delay of the silicon oxide film and shorter than an etching delay of the silicon nitride film, such that the silicon oxide film is selectively etched without etching the silicon nitride film.” which contradicted to previous limitation “b) supplying a gas mixture to the surface, thereby etching the silicon oxide film and a silicon nitride film”. Once the applicants recites that thereby etching the silicon oxide film and a silicon nitride film” in step b), applicants cannot recite that “the silicon oxide film is selectively etched without etching the silicon nitride film” in step b). It is unclear whether the silicon nitride film is etched in step b) (as recited in line 5 of claim 1) or the silicon nitride is NOT etched in step b) (as recited in line 10-11 of claim 1).
Claims 9-10 directly or indirectly depend on claim 1. In claim 1, the applicants recites “b) supplying a gas mixture to the surface, thereby etching the silicon oxide film and the silicon nitride film”. The examiner interprets that this limitation means both silicon oxide film and the silicon nitride film start to etch sometimes in step b). However, in claims 9-10, applicants provides new contradicted limitation by stating “switch from b) to c) before starting of etching of the silicon nitride film”. The limitation “switch from b) to c) before starting of etching of the silicon nitride film” implies that etching of silicon nitride was started after switching from b) to c). Therefore, it implies that etching of silicon nitrides is started in step c) and is NOT started in step b). The limitation in claims 9-10 which implies that etching of silicon nitride starts in step c) is contradicted to previous limitation “b) supplying a gas mixture to the surface, thereby etching the silicon oxide film and the silicon nitride film” which clearly states that etching of silicon nitride occurs/starts in step b). It is unclear from claims 9-10 whether etching of silicon nitride starts/occurs in step b) or starts/occurs in step c) due to contradicted limitation with claim 1.
Claims 2-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph because they directly or indirectly depends on indefinite claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
6. Claim 1 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.
7. Claims 2-16 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See Notice of Reference Cited form.
9. 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