DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-12 and 14 are pending before the Office for review.
In the response filed December 19, 2025:
Claims 1-3, 7-8, 10-12 and 14 were amended.
Claim 13 was canceled.
No new matter is present.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Election/Restrictions
Claim 14 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on August 26, 2025.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-13) in the reply filed on August 26, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-2, 5, 7, 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RALEY et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2018/0239244) in view of SMITH et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0146909) and OGAWA et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2018/0226279).
With regards to claim 1, Raley discloses a substrate processing method comprising providing a substrate (105) in a chamber, the substrate having an etching target film (115) and a pattern layer (120), the pattern layer defining at least one opening on the etching target film (Paragraphs [0013]-[0016], [0024], [0027]).
Raley does not explicitly discloses a tin containing photoresist film, the tin containing photoresist film and forming a modified film by supplying a processing gas to the chamber to form the modified film on a surface of the tin-containing photoresist film, the processing gas including a halogen-containing gas or an oxygen-containing gas.
Smith discloses a substrate processing method comprising providing a tin containing photoresist film for EUV lithograph for patterning a semiconductor substrate (Paragraphs [0019]-[0024]). Ogawa discloses a plasma processing method comprising modifying the surface of a masking layer including a EUV resist comprising performing a modification using a halogen containing gas (Paragraphs [0050], [0054], [0079]-[0080]).As such Raley as modified by Smith and Ogawa renders obvious providing tin containing photoresist film, the tin containing photoresist film and forming a modified film by supplying a processing gas to the chamber to form the modified film on a surface of the tin-containing photoresist film, the processing gas including a halogen-containing gas.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Raley to include the tin-containing photoresist film as rendered obvious by Smith because the reference of Smith teaches metal oxide containing photoresist are suitable for direct EUV patterning to form layers that act as metal oxide hardmask thus substantially reducing the cost by combining the steps of metal oxide containing hardmask formation and optical lithography (Paragraph [0023]) and one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would have had a reasonable expectation of predictably achieving the desired patterning using the tin containing photoresist film as rendered obvious by Smith. MPEP 2143D
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to further modify the modified method of Raley to include the tin-halogen bond film and modification as rendered obvious by Ogawa because one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would have had a reasonable expectation of predictably achieving the desired patterning using the tin-halogen bond film and modification as rendered obvious by Ogawa. MPEP 2143D
With regards to claim 2, the modified teachings of Raley renders obvious wherein forming the modified film includes: forming a plasma from the processing gas; and forming the modified film on the tin-containing photoresist film by the plasma (Ogawa Paragraph [0054], [0064], [0079]-[0080]).
With regards to claim 5, the modified teachings of Raley renders obvious renders obvious after forming the modified film, forming a deposited film (140) on the tin-containing film (Raley Paragraph [0016], Figure 3) Selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results. MPEP 2144.04(IV)(C)
With regards to claim 7, the modified teachings of Raley renders obvious wherein the deposited film is selectively formed on a top surface of the tin-containing film (Raley Paragraphs [0016]-[0017], [0020] Figure 3).
With regards to claim 10, the modified teachings of Raley renders obvious wherein forming the deposited film and forming the modified film are performed in the same chamber. (Raley Paragraph [0024] discloses all the process steps may be performed in the same chamber).
With regards to claim 11, the modified teachings of Raley renders obvious etching the target film after formation of the modified film (Ogawa Paragraphs [0100] discloses etching underlying layer 21 after modification step]).
With regards to claim 12, the modified teachings of Raley renders obvious wherein etching the etching target film and forming the deposited film are performed in the same chamber. (Raley Paragraph [0024] discloses all the process steps may be performed in the same chamber).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RALEY et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2018/0239244) in view of SMITH et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0146909) and OGAWA et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2018/0226279), as applied to claims 1-2, 5, 7, 10-12, in further view of TOIS et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2018/0233350).
With regards to claim 6, the modified teachings of Raley renders obvious the limitations of claim 1 as previously discussed.
However the modified teachings of Raley are silent as to wherein the deposited film is formed by at least one of plasma CVD and ALD.
Tois discloses a plasma processing method comprising depositing by a vapor phase deposition technique for an organic passivation layer including polymer layers by methods including CVD and ALD (Paragraph [0100]). Therefore Raley as modified by Smith, Ogawa and Tois renders forming an organic polymer layer wherein he layer’s deposition is controlled (Raley Paragraphs [0016], [0019]) wherein a vapor phase deposition technique for an organic passivation layer including polymer layers by methods including CVD and ALD (Tois Paragraph [0100]). which renders obvious wherein the deposited film is formed by at least one of plasma CVD and ALD.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to further modify the modified method of Raley to include plasma deposition of CVD and ALD as rendered obvious by Tois because one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would have had a reasonable expectation of predictably achieving the desired patterning using the forming of the deposited film by at least one of plasma CVD and ALD as rendered obvious by Tois. MPEP 2143D
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-9 are allowed.
Claims 3-4 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 5, filed December 19, 2025, with respect to 112 rejection of claim 12 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Applicant’s amendment to claim 12 has overcome the rejection of record. The 112 rejection of claim 12 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-10 of Applicants’ response, filed December 19, 2025, with respect to 103 rejection of claims 3 and 4 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Applicant’s amendments have overcome the rejection of record. The 103 rejection of claims 3-4 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-10 of Applicant’s response, filed December 19, 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-2, 5-7 and 10-12 under 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of SMITH et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0146909).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHANIE P. DUCLAIR whose telephone number is (571)270-5502. The examiner can normally be reached 9-6:30 M-F.
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.
/STEPHANIE P DUCLAIR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713