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
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-8 in the reply filed on 05/12/2026 is acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. The following claim limitations must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
“a first damage profile within the stress compensation layer” and “a composite damage profile” (claim 1)
“the front side of the substrate including one or more of: devices, circuits, and structures to be formed into the devices or the circuits” (claim 5)
“wherein the stress compensation layer comprises an existing sacrificial patterning layer, disposed on the front side” (note bolded portion, claim 6)
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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: there is no description for reference numeral 102A (Fig. 2C) in the specification. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Falk et al. (US Pub. 2020/0118822).
Regarding claim 1, Falk teaches a method of stress management in a substrate 100 (Fig. 1C), comprising:
providing a stress compensation layer 112 on a main surface of the substrate 100 (Fig. 1C); and
performing a chained implant procedure to implant a set of ions into the stress compensation layer (note the repeating implant procedures discussed in Para [0032]), the chained implant procedure comprising:
directing a first implant procedure to the substrate (e.g. ion implantation 114 in Fig. 1D or ion implantation that results to implantation stripes 202 in Fig. 4A), the first implant procedure generating a first damage profile (e.g. Para [0025] or implantation stripe 202) within the stress compensation layer 112 (see Para [0025-0027, 0034], Fig. 1D -1E & Fig. 4A, also see Fig. Fig. 4B and associated text); and
directing a second implant (114 in Fig. 1E & claim 7 or second implant as discussed in Para [0034]) to the substrate 100 (Fig. 1E), different from the first implant, wherein a composite damage profile (e.g. composite damage profile created due to the second implantation shown in Fig. 1E after the first ion implantation shown in Fig. 1D or an inherent interfacial implantation region at the interface of implantation stripe 202 and implantation stripe 204 in Fig. 4A) is generated within the stress compensation layer after the second implant, the composite damage profile resulting in a higher stress response ratio than the first damage profile (since the composite damage profile and/or the interfacial implantation region is a composite of both implantation processes, it is understood that the composite damage profile/interfacial implantation region has a higher stress response ratio).
Regarding claim 2, Falk teaches the method of stress management claim 1, wherein the stress response ratio is determined as a ratio of a stress response to a given implant (Si) compared to a maximum theoretical stress response for the stress compensation layer (SM) (Fig. 1C-1F and Fig. 4A-4B).
Regarding claim 3, Falk teaches the method of stress management claim 1, wherein the first implant is performed at a first ion energy, and the second implant is performed at a second ion energy, different from the first ion energy (Para [0034, 0053- 0054], note Para [0054] wherein Falk teaches a second ion energy for a second implant different than a first ion energy for a first implant).
Regarding claim 4, Falk teaches the method of stress management claim 1, wherein directing the first implant and the second implant comprise directing a beam of silicon ions to the substrate (e.g. Fig. 1D-1E), and wherein the stress compensation layer comprises a silicon nitride material (Para [0034 & 0028]).
Regarding claim 5, Falk teaches the method of stress management claim 1, wherein the stress compensation layer is provided on a front side of the substrate (e.g. second main surface, para [0034]), the front side of the substrate including one or more of: devices, circuits, and structures to be formed into the devices or the circuits (e.g. note features 104 in Fig. 1D-1F & Para [0034]).
Regarding claim 6, Falk teaches the method of stress management claim 5, wherein the stress compensation layer comprises an existing sacrificial patterning layer (e.g. 210, Para [0034]), disposed on the front side (Fig. 4A).
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.
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Falk as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of deVilliers (US Pub. 2015/0294917).
Regarding claim 7, Falk is silent on the method of stress management claim 1, wherein the first implant is performed at a first incidence angle, and the second implant is performed at a second incidence angle, different from the first incidence angle. However, deVilliers teaches a method of stress management in a substrate wherein a first implant is performed at a first incidence angle (Fig. 8), and a second implant is performed at a second incidence angle, different from the first incidence angle (Fig. 12). This has the advantage of correcting bowing and warpage, even in specific areas or different locations in the wafer. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the invention of Falk with the first and second implants having first and second incidence angle, as taught by deVilliers, so as to efficiently correct bowing/warpage in a wafer.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Falk and deVilliers teaches the method of stress management claim 7, wherein the chained implant procedure is completed after the second implant and no other implant is performed (See deVilliers' Fig 8 & Fig. 12).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOR KARIMY whose telephone number is (571) 272-9006. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 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, Eva Montalvo can be reached at (571) 270-3829. 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.
/TIMOR KARIMY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Prosecution Insights