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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1,2,4,8-11,13-16,19,20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andrew D. CARTER, et al, "A1203 Growth on (100) Ino53Gao47As Initiated by Cyclic Trimethylaluminum and Hydrogen Plasma Exposures", The Japan Society of Applied Physics, 2011, vol. 34, a reference submitted by Applicant, and Horie (PG Pub 2013/0295768 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Carter teaches a method for preparing a microelectronic component comprising: providing a structure comprising an exposed layer with a basis of a III-V material (InGaAs, page 1, right column) having a surface in a plasma reactor (page 1, right column) comprising a reaction chamber inside which a substrate (InP, page 1, right column) comprising said the structure is disposed, cleaning the surface of the exposed layer by a cyclic plasma treatment comprising several treatment cycles (Treatments C and D, page 1, right column), each treatment cycle comprising at least purging the reaction chamber, and injecting at least one a nitrogen-, hydrogen-, ammoniac-, argon-, helium-based gas or a mixture of them in the reaction chamber (page 1, right column), and depositing, on the cleaned surface, a second layer of a material based upon at least one of: at least one chemical element chosen from among an element of column III and an element of column V of the periodic table, and a metal oxide (Al2O, page 1, right column).
Carter does not teach forming a plasma from said the gas or mixture in the reaction chamber.
In the same field of endeavor, Horie teaches, forming a plasma from a gas or mixture in the reaction chamber, for the benefits of applying the plasma before deactivation and of improving processing speed (paragraph [0073]), wherein the plasma is generated at a plasma potential (273, fig. 1), and during which a bias voltage (Vpp) is applied to the substrate, for the benefit of improving film property (paragraph [0080]), and the plasma potential being controlled independently (272/273, fig. 1), for the known benefit of providing power to generate the plasma independently.
Thus, it would have been obvious to the skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to form a plasma from said the gas or mixture in the reaction chamber for the benefits of applying the plasma before deactivation and of improving processing speed, wherein the plasma was generated at a plasma potential, and during which a bias voltage is applied to the substrate, for the benefit of improving film property, and the plasma potential being controlled independently, for the known benefit of providing power to generate the plasma independently.
Regarding claim 2, Horie teaches the method according to the preceding claim1, wherein an absolute value of the bias voltage is between 0 Volts and 130 Volts (such as 50 volts, paragraph [0080]).
Regarding claim 4, Carter teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one injected gas is based upon at least one of nitrogen and hydrogen (page 1, right column).
Regarding claim 8, Carter teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein a duration of the purge is greater than or equal to 1 second and less than or equal to 6 seconds (page 1, right column).
Regarding claim 9, Carter teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the cleaning of the surface comprises a number of cycles less than or equal to 20 cycles (page 1, right column).
Regarding claim 10, Carter teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the cleaning of the surface comprises a number of cycles greater than or equal to 3 cycles (page 1, right column).
Regarding claim 11, Horie teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein forming the plasma comprises using a remote source (273 is outside of chamber, fig. 1).
Regarding claim 13, Carter teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein during at least one of forming the plasma, and the cleaning, a temperature of the substrate is between 200 and 3500C (page 1, right column).
Regarding claim 14, Carter teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein during forming the plasma, a pressure in the reaction chamber is less than or equal to 50mTorre (page 1, right column).
Regarding claim 15, Carter teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein each treatment cycle comprises at least one stabilisation of the gases (H2, page 1, right column) injected into the reaction chamber, the stabilisation being performed at least before forming the plasma (page 1, right column).
Regarding claim 16, Carter teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the structure comprises one of a layer, a three-dimensional structure, and a plurality of three-dimensional structures (page 1, right column).
Regarding claim 19, Carter teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the second layer deposited on the cleaned surface is based upon a dielectric material (Al2O3, page 1, right column).
Regarding claim 20, Carter teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the microelectronic component is a transistor (MOSFET, page 1, right column), an active layer of which is based upon a cleaned III-V material.
Claim(s) 3 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andrew D. CARTER, et al, "A1203 Growth on (100) Ino53Gao47As Initiated by Cyclic Trimethylaluminum and Hydrogen Plasma Exposures", The Japan Society of Applied Physics, 2011, vol. 34, a reference submitted by Applicant, and Horie (PG Pub 2013/0295768 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yan et al (PG Pub 2016/0293384 A1).
Regarding claim 3, the previous combination remains as applied in claim 1.
Carter does not teach wherein the bias voltage is applied for at least 70% of a duration of formation of the plasma.
In the same field of endeavor, Yan teaches the bias voltage is applied for at least 70% of a duration of formation of the plasma (applying bias while exposing to plasma, paragraph [0007]), for the benefit of removing contamination (paragraph [0005]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the bias voltage for at least 70% of a duration of formation of the plasma for the benefit of removing contamination.
Regarding claim 12, the previous combination remains as applied in claim 1.
Carter further teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein forming the plasma comprises using an inductive source (page 1, right column), and a power of the inductive radiofrequency source is between 100 and 300W (page 1, right column).
Carter does not teach using radiofrequency source.
In the same field of endeavor, Yan teaches radiofrequency source (RF, paragraph [0007), for the benefit of removing contamination (paragraph [0005]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use radiofrequency source, for the benefit of removing contamination.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andrew D. CARTER, et al, "A1203 Growth on (100) Ino53Gao47As Initiated by Cyclic Trimethylaluminum and Hydrogen Plasma Exposures", The Japan Society of Applied Physics, 2011, vol. 34, a reference submitted by Applicant, and Horie (PG Pub 2013/0295768 A1) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Xiaoye QIN, et al , "Impact of N2 and forming gas plasma exposure on the growth and interfacial characteristics of A1203 on AIGaN", APPLIED PHYSICS LETTERS, 103, 221604, 2013, a reference submitted by Applicant.
Regarding claim 5, the previous combination remains as applied in claim 4.
Carter does not teach the injected gas is a mixture of dinitrogen and dihydrogen.
In the same field of endeavor, Qin teaches the injected gas is a mixture of dinitrogen and dihydrogen, for the benefit of removing surface contamination (page 1, left column).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make the injected gas a mixture of dinitrogen and dihydrogen for the benefit of removing surface contamination.
Claim(s) 1, 7, 17, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Junwoo SON, et al , "In-situ nitrogen plasma passivation of A1203/GaN interface states", J. Vac. Sci Technol A, Vol 33, No 2, 020602, 2015, a reference submitted by Applicant, and Horie (PG Pub 2013/0295768 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Son teaches a method for preparing a microelectronic component comprising: providing a structure comprising an exposed layer with a basis of a III-V material (GaN, page 1, left column) having a surface in a plasma reactor comprising a reaction chamber (ALD reactor, page 1, right column) inside which a substrate comprising said the structure is disposed, cleaning the surface of the exposed layer by a cyclic plasma treatment comprising several treatment cycles (page 1, right column), each treatment cycle comprising at least purging the reaction chamber, and injecting at least one a nitrogen-, hydrogen-, ammoniac-, argon-, helium-based gas or a mixture of them in the reaction chamber (page 1, right column), and depositing, on the cleaned surface, a second layer of a material based upon at least one of: at least one chemical element chosen from among an element of column III and an element of column V of the periodic table, and a metal oxide (page 1, right column).
Son does not teach forming a plasma from said the gas or mixture in the reaction chamber.
In the same field of endeavor, Horie teaches, forming a plasma from a gas or mixture in the reaction chamber, for the benefits of applying the plasma before deactivation and of improving processing speed (paragraph [0073]), wherein the plasma is generated at a plasma potential (273, fig. 1), and during which a bias voltage (Vpp) is applied to the substrate, for the benefit of improving film property (paragraph [0080]), and the plasma potential being controlled independently (272/273, fig. 1), for the known benefit of providing power to generate the plasma independently.
Thus, it would have been obvious to the skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to form a plasma from said the gas or mixture in the reaction chamber for the benefits of applying the plasma before deactivation and of improving processing speed, wherein the plasma was generated at a plasma potential, and during which a bias voltage is applied to the substrate, for the benefit of improving film property, and the plasma potential being controlled independently, for the known benefit of providing power to generate the plasma independently.
Regarding claim 7, Son teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein a duration of formation of the plasma is greater than 7 seconds and less than or equal to 15 seconds (page 1, right column).
Regarding claim 17, Son teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the exposed layer is based upon a III-N material (page 1, left column).
Regarding claim 18, Carter teaches the method according to claim17, wherein the exposed layer is based upon gallium nitride (page 1, left column).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Junwoo SON, et al , "In-situ nitrogen plasma passivation of A1203/GaN interface states", J. Vac. Sci Technol A, Vol 33, No 2, 020602, 2015, a reference submitted by Applicant, and Horie (PG Pub 2013/0295768 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Xiaoye QIN, et al , "Impact of N2 and forming gas plasma exposure on the growth and interfacial characteristics of A1203 on AIGaN", APPLIED PHYSICS LETTERS, 103, 221604, 2013, a reference submitted by Applicant.
Regarding claim 6, the previous combination remains as applied in claim 1.
Son does not teach the at least one injected gas comprises dihydrogen, and dihydrogen fraction is between 1% and 99%.
In the same field of endeavor, Qin teaches the at least one injected gas comprises dihydrogen, and dihydrogen fraction is between 1% and 99% (page 1, right column), for the benefit of removing surface contaminants (page 1, left column).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make the at least one injected gas to comprise dihydrogen, and dihydrogen fraction was between 1% and 99%, for the benefit of removing surface contaminants.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Junwoo SON, et al , "In-situ nitrogen plasma passivation of A1203/GaN interface states", J. Vac. Sci Technol A, Vol 33, No 2, 020602, 2015, a reference submitted by Applicant, and Horie (PG Pub 2013/0295768 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lee et al (PG Pub 2010/0200884 A1).
Regarding claim 21, the previous combination remains as applied in claim 1.
Son does not teach the microelectronic component is a light-emitting diode.
In the same field of endeavor, Lee teaches a light-emitting diode provides lighting with low-power consumption (paragraph [0003]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make the microelectronic component a light-emitting diode, for the benefit of providing lighting with low-power consumption.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FEIFEI YEUNG LOPEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-1882. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8am to 4pm EST.
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, Dale Page can be reached at 571 270 7877. 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.
/FEIFEI YEUNG LOPEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899