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 Group I, claims 1-17 and 21-23, in the reply filed on 12/10/2025 is acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: “25” in Figure 3, and “47” in Figure 4. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-17 and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Veber et al. (US-20230298896-A1) in view of Dole et al. (US-20190393047-A1) and Han et al. (US-20160293445-A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Veber teaches a method of plasma etching a substrate, the method comprising cyclically (Paragraph [0002] teaches a method that includes plasma etching a substrate. Paragraph [0087] the process can be repeated cyclically):
performing a first etch step (Paragraph [0049] Figure 4 a first etch step (element 410) is conducted) to etch a target material, the substrate comprising a patterned mask disposed over the target material and having openings in the patterned mask (Paragraph [0046] Figure 3A substrate (element 300) includes a patterned mask layer (element 302) that includes openings and is over the substrate layer, which is etched), performing the first etch step comprising generating a first plasma from a carbon containing precursor gas (Paragraphs [0049-0052] the first etch generates a first plasma using an etch chemistry that includes fluorocarbons) and exposing the substrate to the first plasma to form a first passivation layer and etch the target material, the first passivation layer comprising a polymer material over sidewalls of the openings (Paragraph [0051] The substrate is etched by exposure to the plasma. Paragraph [0055] the etch process forms a sidewall coating from polymeric material); and
performing a second step, performing the second step comprising generating a second plasma from a tungsten containing precursor gas and exposing the substrate to the second plasma (Paragraphs [0066-0067] a second plasma is formed, using a metal-containing gas that can be tungsten hexafluoride. The substrate is exposed to the second plasma to deposit material on the sidewalls).
Veber fails to teach that the second step is an etch step to remove a portion of the first passivation layer.
Dole teaches methods of etching a semiconductor substrate (Paragraph [0004]). Dole teaches a method of etching that utilizes a plasma generated from a process gas that comprises tungsten hexafluoride (WF6) (Paragraph [0005]). Dole teaches that during etching, tungsten-containing fragments will deposit on sidewalls (Paragraph [0010]).
Han teaches methods of fabricating a semiconductor device that include etching a layer on a substrate (Paragraph [0004]). Han teaches that a method of etching that includes a first etch process that forms a layer on the sidewalls of a trench from ions from the plasma and by-products of the etching process (Paragraph [0043] first sidewall patterns are formed). Han teaches that the method of etching includes a second etch process that deforms the first layer formed on the sidewall and further deposits material on the sidewalls to form a second layer on the sidewalls (Paragraphs [0047-0048])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the method of Veber by modifying the second step such that the second step included both etching the first passivation layer, as taught by Han, and forming a second passivation layer with the tungsten hexafluoride gas, as taught by Veber. This would be possible because as taught by Dole, the use of tungsten hexafluoride as a plasma process gas can allow for a process that both etches and deposits material.
This modification would have been obvious as it can be considered the application of a known technique to a known method to yield predictable results. The method of Veber can be considered a base method and the teachings of Han, regarding the second process step, would be applicable to this base method (because, as taught by Dole, tungsten hexafluoride is a process gas known to be suitable for such a process step) and would have had the predictable result of a second step that would both etch a first passivation layer and deposit a second passivation layer. See MPEP 2143(I)(D).
Regarding Claim 2, modified Veber teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as outlined above. Veber further teaches wherein the second plasma is further generated from a precursor gas mixture comprising nitrogen (N2) and hydrogen (H2), and wherein the tungsten containing precursor gas comprises tungsten fluoride (WF6) (Paragraph [0067] second plasma includes a metal-containing gas that can be WF6. Paragraph [0068] second plasma can include hydrogen (H2). Paragraph [0076] second plasma can include nitrogen (N2)).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Veber teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as outlined above. Veber further teaches wherein the tungsten containing precursor gas comprises tungsten fluoride (WF6) (Paragraph [0067] second plasma includes a metal-containing gas that can be WF6).
Veber fails to teach wherein the second plasma is further generated from a precursor gas mixture comprising oxygen (O2), and carbonyl sulfide (COS). However, Veber teaches that the second plasma can include an oxygen-containing reactant (Paragraph [0037]).
Dole teaches methods of etching a semiconductor substrate (Paragraph [0004]). Dole teaches a method of etching that utilizes a plasma generated from a process gas that comprises tungsten hexafluoride (WF6) (Paragraph [0005]). Dole teaches that during etching, tungsten-containing fragments will deposit on sidewalls (Paragraph [0010]). Dole further teaches that the composition of the process gas can include oxidants, such as O2 and COS (Paragraph [0041]).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include O2 and COS within the precursor gas, as the oxygen-containing reactants taught by Veber since, as taught by Dole, O2 and COS are known process gases and oxidants to include with tungsten hexafluoride and the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.07.
Regarding Claim 4, modified Veber teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as outlined above. Veber further teaches wherein the tungsten containing precursor gas comprises tungsten fluoride (WF6) (Paragraph [0067] second plasma includes a metal-containing gas that can be WF6).
Veber fails to teach wherein the second plasma is further generated from a precursor gas mixture comprising oxygen (O2). However, Veber teaches that the second plasma can include an oxygen-containing reactant (Paragraph [0037]).
Dole teaches methods of etching a semiconductor substrate (Paragraph [0004]). Dole teaches a method of etching that utilizes a plasma generated from a process gas that comprises tungsten hexafluoride (WF6) (Paragraph [0005]). Dole teaches that during etching, tungsten-containing fragments will deposit on sidewalls (Paragraph [0010]). Dole further teaches that the composition of the process gas can include oxidants, such as O2 (Paragraph [0041]).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include O2 within the precursor gas, as the oxygen-containing reactants taught by Veber since, as taught by Dole, O2 are known process gases and oxidants to include with tungsten hexafluoride and the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.07.
Regarding Claim 5, modified Veber teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as outlined above. Veber further teaches wherein the patterned mask comprises an amorphous carbon layer (ACL) (Paragraph [0049] the mask layer can contain amorphous carbon).
Regarding Claim 6, modified Veber teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as outlined above. Veber further teaches wherein the carbon containing precursor gas comprises a fluorocarbon (Paragraphs [0049-0052] the first etch generates a first plasma using an etch chemistry that includes fluorocarbons).
Regarding Claim 7, modified Veber teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as outlined above. Veber further teaches wherein the second etch step is performed after the first etch step without an intervening purge step (Paragraph [0049] Figure 4 no purge step is taught).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Veber teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as outlined above. Veber further teaches wherein the second etch step forms a second passivation layer comprising tungsten over the patterned mask (Paragraph [0073] the deposition of the protective film can occur on the mask layer).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Veber teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as outlined above.
Veber fails to explicitly teach wherein the first etch step is performed for a first duration and the second etch step is performed for a second duration, the second duration being shorter than the first duration.
However, Veber teaches that exposing the substrate to the second plasma can occur for between 0.5 and 1000 seconds and that the exposure time for the second plasma may be different than the exposure time for the first plasma (Paragraph [0074]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have selected and incorporated an exposure time for the first plasma that was different than the exposure time for the second plasma such that second duration was shorter than the first duration as claimed. One of ordinary skill in the art practicing the method of modified Veber would have had to pick some duration for the exposure of the first plasma would have had a reasonable expectation of success is selection a suitable duration. This selection would have been obvious as Veber teaches that the exposure time for the two plasmas can be different and when they are different there are only two possible situations: either the first duration is shorter or the second duration is shorter. See MPEP 2143(I)(E).
Regarding Claim 10, Veber teaches a method of plasma etching a substrate, the method comprising cyclically (Paragraph [0002] teaches a method that includes plasma etching a substrate. Paragraph [0087] the process can be repeated cyclically):
etching a target material with a first plasma (Paragraph [0049] Figure 4 a first etch step (element 410) is conducted), the substrate comprising a patterned mask disposed over the target material and having openings in the patterned mask ( Paragraph [0046] Figure 3A substrate (element 300) includes a patterned mask layer (element 302) that includes openings and is over the substrate layer, which is etched), the etching of the target material comprising forming a first passivation layer comprising a polymer material over sidewalls of the openings while etching the target material (Paragraph [0051] The substrate is etched by exposure to the plasma. Paragraph [0055] the etch process forms a sidewall coating from polymeric material); and
with a second plasma depositing a second passivation layer comprising tungsten (Paragraphs [0066-0067] a second plasma is formed, using a metal-containing gas that can be tungsten hexafluoride. The substrate is exposed to the second plasma to deposit material on the sidewalls).
Veber fails to teach that the second step is an etch step that etches a part of the first passivation layer.
Dole teaches methods of etching a semiconductor substrate (Paragraph [0004]). Dole teaches a method of etching that utilizes a plasma generated from a process gas that comprises tungsten hexafluoride (WF6) (Paragraph [0005]). Dole teaches that during etching, tungsten-containing fragments will deposit on sidewalls (Paragraph [0010]).
Han teaches methods of fabricating a semiconductor device that include etching a layer on a substrate (Paragraph [0004]). Han teaches that a method of etching that includes a first etch process that forms a layer on the sidewalls of a trench from ions from the plasma and by-products of the etching process (Paragraph [0043] first sidewall patterns are formed). Han teaches that the method of etching includes a second etch process that deforms the first layer formed on the sidewall and further deposits material on the sidewalls to form a second layer on the sidewalls (Paragraphs [0047-0048])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the method of Veber by modifying the second step such that the second step included both etching the first passivation layer, as taught by Han, and forming a second passivation layer with the tungsten hexafluoride gas, as taught by Veber. This would be possible because as taught by Dole, the use of tungsten hexafluoride as a plasma process gas can allow for a process that both etches and deposits material.
This modification would have been obvious as it can be considered the application of a known technique to a known method to yield predictable results. The method of Veber can be considered a base method and the teachings of Han, regarding the second process step, would be applicable to this base method (because, as taught by Dole, tungsten hexafluoride is a process gas known to be suitable for such a process step) and would have had the predictable result of a second step that would both etch a first passivation layer and deposit a second passivation layer. See MPEP 2143(I)(D).
Regarding Claim 11, modified Veber teaches all the limitations of claim 10 as outlined above. Veber further teaches wherein the second plasma is generated from a precursor gas mixture comprising nitrogen (N2), hydrogen (H2), and tungsten fluoride (WF6) (Paragraph [0067] second plasma includes a metal-containing gas that can be WF6. Paragraph [0068] second plasma can include hydrogen (H2). Paragraph [0076] second plasma can include nitrogen (N2)).
Regarding Claim 12, modified Veber teaches all the limitations of claim 10 as outlined above. Veber further teaches wherein the tungsten containing precursor gas comprises tungsten fluoride (WF6) (Paragraph [0067] second plasma includes a metal-containing gas that can be WF6).
Veber fails to teach wherein the second plasma is further generated from a precursor gas mixture comprising oxygen (O2), and carbonyl sulfide (COS). However, Veber teaches that the second plasma can include an oxygen-containing reactant (Paragraph [0037]).
Dole teaches methods of etching a semiconductor substrate (Paragraph [0004]). Dole teaches a method of etching that utilizes a plasma generated from a process gas that comprises tungsten hexafluoride (WF6) (Paragraph [0005]). Dole teaches that during etching, tungsten-containing fragments will deposit on sidewalls (Paragraph [0010]). Dole further teaches that the composition of the process gas can include oxidants, such as O2 and COS (Paragraph [0041]).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include O2 and COS within the precursor gas, as the oxygen-containing reactants taught by Veber since, as taught by Dole, O2 and COS are known process gases and oxidants to include with tungsten hexafluoride and the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.07.
Regarding Claim 13, modified Veber teaches all the limitations of claim 10 as outlined above. Veber further teaches wherein the tungsten containing precursor gas comprises tungsten fluoride (WF6) (Paragraph [0067] second plasma includes a metal-containing gas that can be WF6).
Veber fails to teach wherein the second plasma is further generated from a precursor gas mixture comprising oxygen (O2). However, Veber teaches that the second plasma can include an oxygen-containing reactant (Paragraph [0037]).
Dole teaches methods of etching a semiconductor substrate (Paragraph [0004]). Dole teaches a method of etching that utilizes a plasma generated from a process gas that comprises tungsten hexafluoride (WF6) (Paragraph [0005]). Dole teaches that during etching, tungsten-containing fragments will deposit on sidewalls (Paragraph [0010]). Dole further teaches that the composition of the process gas can include oxidants, such as O2 (Paragraph [0041]).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include O2 within the precursor gas, as the oxygen-containing reactants taught by Veber since, as taught by Dole, O2 are known process gases and oxidants to include with tungsten hexafluoride and the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.07.
Regarding Claim 14, modified Veber teaches all the limitations of claim 10 as outlined above. Veber further teaches wherein the patterned mask comprises an amorphous carbon layer (ACL) (Paragraph [0049] the mask layer can contain amorphous carbon).
Regarding Claim 15, modified Veber teaches all the limitations of claim 10 as outlined above. Veber further teaches wherein the first plasma is generated from a precursor gas mixture comprising a fluorocarbon (Paragraphs [0049-0052] the first etch generates a first plasma using an etch chemistry that includes fluorocarbons).
Regarding Claim 16, modified Veber teaches all the limitations of claim 10 as outlined above. Veber further teaches wherein the etching with the second plasma is performed after the etching with the first plasma without an intervening purge step (Paragraph [0049] Figure 4 no purge step is taught).
Regarding Claim 17, modified Veber teaches all the limitations of claim 10 as outlined above.
Veber fails to explicitly teach wherein the first etch step is performed for a first duration and the second etch step is performed for a second duration, the second duration being shorter than the first duration.
However, Veber teaches that exposing the substrate to the second plasma can occur for between 0.5 and 1000 seconds and that the exposure time for the second plasma may be different than the exposure time for the first plasma (Paragraph [0074]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have selected and incorporated an exposure time for the first plasma that was different than the exposure time for the second plasma such that second duration was shorter than the first duration as claimed. One of ordinary skill in the art practicing the method of modified Veber would have had to pick some duration for the exposure of the first plasma would have had a reasonable expectation of success is selection a suitable duration. This selection would have been obvious as Veber teaches that the exposure time for the two plasmas can be different and when they are different there are only two possible situations: either the first duration is shorter or the second duration is shorter. See MPEP 2143(I)(E).
Regarding Claim 21, Veber teaches a method of plasma etching a substrate, the method comprising cyclically (Paragraph [0002] teaches a method that includes plasma etching a substrate. Paragraph [0087] the process can be repeated cyclically):
etching a target material with a first plasma (Paragraph [0049] Figure 4 a first etch step (element 410) is conducted), the substrate comprising an amorphous carbon layer (ACL) over the target material and having openings in the ACL (Paragraph [0046] Figure 3A substrate (element 300) includes a patterned mask layer (element 302) that includes openings and is over the substrate layer, which is etched. Paragraph [0049] the mask layer can contain amorphous carbon), the etching of the target material comprising forming a first passivation layer comprising a polymer material over sidewalls of the openings while etching the target material (Paragraph [0051] The substrate is etched by exposure to the plasma. Paragraph [0055] the etch process forms a sidewall coating from polymeric material), the first plasma comprising a fluorocarbon (Paragraphs [0049-0052] the first etch generates a first plasma using an etch chemistry that includes fluorocarbons); and
with a second plasma depositing a second passivation layer comprising tungsten, the second plasma being generated from a precursor gas mixture comprising tungsten fluoride (WF6) (Paragraphs [0066-0067] a second plasma is formed, using a metal-containing gas that can be tungsten hexafluoride. The substrate is exposed to the second plasma to deposit material on the sidewalls).
Veber fails to teach that the second step is an etch step that etches a part of the first passivation layer.
Dole teaches methods of etching a semiconductor substrate (Paragraph [0004]). Dole teaches a method of etching that utilizes a plasma generated from a process gas that comprises tungsten hexafluoride (WF6) (Paragraph [0005]). Dole teaches that during etching, tungsten-containing fragments will deposit on sidewalls (Paragraph [0010]).
Han teaches methods of fabricating a semiconductor device that include etching a layer on a substrate (Paragraph [0004]). Han teaches that a method of etching that includes a first etch process that forms a layer on the sidewalls of a trench from ions from the plasma and by-products of the etching process (Paragraph [0043] first sidewall patterns are formed). Han teaches that the method of etching includes a second etch process that deforms the first layer formed on the sidewall and further deposits material on the sidewalls to form a second layer on the sidewalls (Paragraphs [0047-0048])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the method of Veber by modifying the second step such that the second step included both etching the first passivation layer, as taught by Han, and forming a second passivation layer with the tungsten hexafluoride gas, as taught by Veber. This would be possible because as taught by Dole, the use of tungsten hexafluoride as a plasma process gas can allow for a process that both etches and deposits material.
This modification would have been obvious as it can be considered the application of a known technique to a known method to yield predictable results. The method of Veber can be considered a base method and the teachings of Han, regarding the second process step, would be applicable to this base method (because, as taught by Dole, tungsten hexafluoride is a process gas known to be suitable for such a process step) and would have had the predictable result of a second step that would both etch a first passivation layer and deposit a second passivation layer. See MPEP 2143(I)(D).
Regarding Claim 22, modified Veber teaches all the limitations of claim 21 as outlined above. Veber further teaches wherein the precursor gas mixture further comprises nitrogen (N2), hydrogen (H2), oxygen (02), carbonyl sulfide (COS), or combinations thereof (Paragraph [0068] second plasma can include hydrogen (H2). Paragraph [0076] second plasma can include nitrogen (N2)).
Regarding Claim 23, modified Veber teaches all the limitations of claim 21 as outlined above. Veber further teaches wherein the etching with the first plasma is performed for a first duration and the etching with the second plasma is performed for a second duration, the second duration being different than the first duration (Paragraph [0074] exposing the substrate to the second plasma can occur for between 0.5 and 1000 seconds. The exposure time for the second plasma may be different than the exposure time for the first plasma).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW KEELAN LAOBAK whose telephone number is (703)756-5447. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00am - 5:30pm.
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.
/A.K.L./ Examiner, Art Unit 1713
/BINH X TRAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713