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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities: claim 1 and claim 12 each recites “a clean dielectrics layer” which appears to be a mistyping of --a clean dielectric layer--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-23 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.
Regarding claim 1, claim 1 recites the limitation “optionally maintaining the reactor at a pressure of about 100 torr or less” and “optionally treating the substrate to form a clean metal hydride layer and a clean dielectrics layer using a reducing agent”. The term “optionally” leads to confusion over the intended scope of a claim because it is unclear whether the “maintaining the reactor at a pressure of about 100 torr or less” and “treating the substrate to form a clean metal hydride layer and a clean dielectrics layer using a reducing agent” are limitations. In addition, it is unclear how to form a clean metal hydride layer when the substrate does not comprise a metal hydride, specifically, when the substrate comprising a first surface being a dielectric surface and a second surface being silicon surface, metal surface or metal compound surface.
Claim 1 further recites “c) introducing into the reactor at least one precursor comprising a halogenated silicon-containing compound that forms a silicon-containing layer more abundantly on the at least one surface than on the at least one second surface.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation “the at least one surface” in the claim.
Regarding claims 2, 3, 4, 9, 13, 14, 15, 20, 21, claim 2, claim 3, claim 4, claim 9, claim 13, claim 14, claim 15, claim 20 and claim 21 each recites “the group”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claims 5 and 16, claim 5 and claim 16 each recites “the consisting of”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 12, claim 12 recites the limitation “optionally maintaining the reactor at a pressure of about 100 torr or less” and “optionally treating the substrate to form a clean metal or metal hydride layer and a clean dielectrics layer using a reducing agent; and repeating some or all of steps c through h until the silicon and oxygen containing dielectric film reaches a desired thickness”. The term “optionally” leads to confusion over the intended scope of a claim because it is unclear whether the “maintaining the reactor at a pressure of about 100 torr or less” and “treating the substrate to form a clean metal or metal hydride layer and a clean dielectrics layer using a reducing agent; and repeating some or all of steps c through h until the silicon and oxygen containing dielectric film reaches a desired thickness” are limitations. In addition, it is unclear how to form a clean metal or metal hydride layer when the substrate does not comprise a metal or metal hydride, specifically, when the substrate comprising a first surface being a dielectric surface and a second surface being silicon surface, or metal compound surface.
Claims depending from the rejected claims noted above are rejected at least on the same basis as the claim(s) from which the dependent claims depend.
Appropriate correction is required.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited art discloses similar materials, devices and methods.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SOPHIA T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1686. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am -5:00 pm, 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, BRITT D HANLEY can be reached at (571)270-3042. 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.
/SOPHIA T NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893