DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-14 and 21-22 are pending before the Office for review.
Claims 1 and 10 were amended.
Claims 15-20 were canceled.
Claims 21-22 are newly added.
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.
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 1-14 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WANG et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2006/0219663).
With regards to claim 1, Wang discloses a chemical mechanical polishing slurry, the chemical mechanical polishing slurry consisting essentially of: deionized water (Paragraph [0107]) and abrasive parties (Paragraph [0094]).
Wang is silent as to an aqueous solution including a temperature-sensitive oxidizing agent, the temperature-sensitive oxidizing agent being configured to control both a static etch rate of a metal layer and a removal rate of the metal layer in a chemical mechanical polishing process when a polishing temperature of the chemical mechanical polishing process is 100C to 75°C.
However Wang discloses a composition comprising an oxidizing agent wherein the oxidizing agent which is not a peroxide type oxidizer in order to prevent an oxidizer which exhibits low removal rate at low down force and poor planarization; poor dishing performance (Paragraph [0065]) wherein the oxidizer provides high removal rates (Paragraph [0069]); and wherein the composition exhibits reduced topographical defects, such as dishing and erosion, reduced residues, less surface defects and scratches, improved planarity and improved substrate finish (Paragraph [0111]) therefore rendering obvious including a temperature-sensitive oxidizing agent, the temperature-sensitive oxidizing agent being configured to control both a static etch rate of a metal layer and a removal rate of the metal layer in a chemical mechanical polishing process when a polishing temperature of the chemical mechanical polishing process is 100C to 75°C. In addition the composition of Wang renders obvious Applicant’s claimed composition and would exhibit the same properties including desired static etch rate of metal layer and removal rates of metals. "Products of identical chemical composition can not have mutually exclusive properties." In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. Id. MPEP 2112.01(II)
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 composition of Wang to include configured temperature sensitive oxidizing agent as rendered obvious by Wang because the reference of Wang teaches that such oxidizer produces an aqueous solution which exhibits reduced topographical defects, such as dishing and erosion, reduced residues, less surface defects and scratches, improved planarity and improved substrate finish (Paragraph [0111]) 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 chemical mechanical polishing slurry using the oxidizing agent as rendered obvious by Wang. MPEP 2143D
With regards to claim 2, the modified teachings of Wang renders obvious wherein the abrasive particles comprise at least one of silica, alumina, ceria, titania, zirconia, magnesia, germania, and mangania. (Paragraph [0094]).
With regards to claim 3, the modified teachings of Wang renders obvious wherein a concentration of the abrasive particles is 0.2 to 20 % (Paragraph [0094]) which overlaps Applicant’s claimed amount of 1 wt% to 10 wt% in the aqueous solution. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) MPEP 2144.05
With regards to claim 4, the modified teachings of Wang renders obvious wherein the temperature-sensitive oxidizing agent comprises at least one of Sodium Persulfate (Paragraph [0070]).
With regards to claim 5, the modified teachings of Wang renders obvious wherein the aqueous solution further comprises a pH adjusting agent. (Paragraph [0101]).
With regards to claim 6, the modified teachings of Wang renders obvious wherein the pH adjusting agent comprises at least one of potassium hydroxide (KOH), ammonium hydroxide (NH4OH), tetramethylammonium hydroxide (TMAH). (Paragraph [101]).
With regards to claim 7, the modified teachings of Wang renders obvious wherein a pH of the aqueous solution is 1 to 8. (Paragraph [0102] discloses an acidic pH of 1-7).
With regards to claims 8-9, the modified teachings of Wang discloses wherein the aqueous solution further comprises an additive including ferric nitrate (Paragraph [0073]) which renders obvious wherein the aqueous solution further comprises a catalyst, wherein the catalyst comprises at least one of ferric nitrate.
With regards to claim 10, Wang discloses a chemical mechanical polishing slurry, the chemical mechanical polishing slurry consisting essentially of: deionized water (Paragraph [0107]), abrasive particles (Paragraph [0094]) and a pH adjusting agent. (Paragraph [0101]).
Wang is silent as to an aqueous solution including a temperature-sensitive oxidizing agent, the temperature-sensitive oxidizing agent being configured to control both a static etch rate of a metal layer and a removal rate of the metal layer in a chemical mechanical polishing process when a polishing temperature of the chemical mechanical polishing process is 100C to 75°C and an aqueous solution including a catalyst.
However Wang discloses a composition comprising an oxidizing agent wherein the oxidizing agent which is not a peroxide type oxidizer in order to prevent an oxidizer which exhibits low removal rate at low down force and poor planarization; poor dishing performance (Paragraph [0065]) wherein the oxidizer provides high removal rates (Paragraph [0069]); and wherein the composition exhibits reduced topographical defects, such as dishing and erosion, reduced residues, less surface defects and scratches, improved planarity and improved substrate finish (Paragraph [0111]) discloses wherein the aqueous solution further comprises an additive including ferric nitrate (Paragraph [0073]) rendering obvious including a temperature-sensitive oxidizing agent, the temperature-sensitive oxidizing agent being configured to control both a static etch rate of a metal layer and a removal rate of the metal layer in a chemical mechanical polishing process when a polishing temperature of the chemical mechanical polishing process is 100C to 75°C and wherein the aqueous solution further comprises a catalyst, wherein the catalyst comprises at least one of ferric nitrate. In addition the composition of Wang renders obvious Applicant’s claimed composition and would exhibit the same properties including desired static etch rate of metal layer and removal rates of metals. "Products of identical chemical composition can not have mutually exclusive properties." In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. Id. MPEP 2112.01(II)
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 composition of Wang to include configured temperature sensitive oxidizing agent as rendered obvious by Wang because the reference of Wang teaches that such oxidizer produces an aqueous solution which exhibits reduced topographical defects, such as dishing and erosion, reduced residues, less surface defects and scratches, improved planarity and improved substrate finish (Paragraph [0111]) 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 chemical mechanical polishing slurry using the oxidizing agent as rendered obvious by Wang. MPEP 2143D
With regards to claim 11, the modified teachings of Wang renders obvious wherein the abrasive particles comprises silica. (Paragraph [0094]), and wherein a concentration of the abrasive particles is 0.2 to 20 % (Paragraph [0094]) which overlaps Applicant’s claimed amount of 1 wt% to 10 wt% in the aqueous solution. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) MPEP 2144.05
With regards to claim 12, the modified teachings of Wang renders obvious wherein the temperature-sensitive oxidizing agent comprises sodium persulfate (Paragraph [0070]), and a concentration of the sodium persulfate is about 0.5 to about 6 wt% (Paragraph [0070]) which renders obvious Applicants claimed amount of 0.5 wt% to 5 wt% in the aqueous solution. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) MPEP 2144.05
With regards to claim 13, the modified teachings of Wang renders obvious wherein the pH adjusting agent comprises at least one of potassium hydroxide (KOH), ammonium hydroxide (NH4OH), tetramethylammonium hydroxide (TMAH). (Paragraph [101]), and wherein the aqueous solution has a pH of 1 to 8. (Paragraph [0102] discloses an acidic pH of 1-7).
With regards to claim 14, the modified teachings of Wang renders obvious discloses wherein the aqueous solution further comprises an additive including ferric nitrate (Paragraph [0073]) in an amount between about 0.1 wt% and about 10 wt% (Paragraph [0073]) which renders obvious wherein the catalyst comprises ferric nitrate, and a concentration of ferric nitrate is 1 wt% to 2 wt% in the aqueous solution. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) MPEP 2144.05
With regards to claims 21-22, the modified teachings of Wang renders obvious wherein the chemical polishing slurry does not include hydrogen peroxide. (Paragraph [0065]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-10 of Applicant’s response, filed May 11, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-14 under 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. In particular, Applicant’s amendments have overcome the prior art of record. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Wang et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2006/0219663).
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
Prosecution Insights