DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 7/21/25 has been entered.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/21/25 have been fully considered.
Applicant has argued that the cited references do not disclose supplying an oxidative aqueous solution to a peripheral portion of a substrate to etch the peripheral portion first, and then supplying the oxidative aqueous solution to an entire rear surface of the substrate to etch the rear surface, as recited in amended Claim 1. The argument is persuasive to overcome the rejections of the previous Office Action. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US Publication 2019/0096730 to Morita et al.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1, 2, 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Publication 2015/0357197 to Peethala in view of US Publication 2018/0269076 to Nanba et al. and US Publication 2019/0096730 to Morita et al.
Regarding Claim 1, Peethala et al. teaches a substrate processing method (Figure 4), comprising: holding a substrate on which a boron-containing silicon film is formed (Figure 1); supplying an oxidative aqueous solution including hydrofluoric acid and nitric acid (HNA) to the held substrate peripheral portion (Paragraph 28); and etching the boron-containing silicon film of the substrate with the oxidative aqueous solution.
Regarding Claim 1, Peethala et al. teaches applying the chemical solution through a spray nozzle or other solution outlet port wherein other solution spraying or applying mechanism may be used as well (Paragraph 21), but does not expressly teach wherein in the supplying of the oxidative aqueous solution, the oxidative aqueous solution is supplied by an upper nozzle toward a front surface of a peripheral portion of the substrate, and the oxidative aqueous solution is supplied by a lower nozzle toward a rear surface of a peripheral portion of the substrate. However, Nanba et al. teaches supplying an oxidative aqueous solution including hydrofluoric acid and nitric acid (HNA) to a held substrate wherein in the supplying of the oxidative aqueous solution, the oxidative aqueous solution is supplied by an upper nozzle toward a front surface of a peripheral portion of the substrate, and the oxidative aqueous solution is supplied by a lower nozzle toward a rear surface of a peripheral portion of the substrate (See Figure 6, and related discussion) in order to etch a peripheral area. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to provide the etching method of Peethla et al. with the nozzle arrangement of Nanba et al. in order to etch the peripheral area of a substrate with predictable results.
Regarding Claim 1, Peethla in view on Nanba et al. does not expressly teach supplying an oxidative aqueous solution to a peripheral portion of a substrate to etch the peripheral portion first, and then supplying the oxidative aqueous solution to an entire rear surface of the substrate to etch the rear surface. However, Morita et al. teaches supplying an oxidative aqueous solution to a peripheral portion of a substrate (Fig. 3) to etch the peripheral portion first (Paragraphs 50, 55-63), and then (See Fig 17, 20 and 21 for process flow) supplying the oxidative aqueous solution to an entire rear surface of the substrate (Fig. 4) to etch the rear surface (Paragraphs 68-77). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to provide the etching method of Peethla et al. in view of Nanba et al. with the sequential processing steps of Morita et al. in order to etch peripheral and rear surfaces of a substrate with predictable results.
Regarding Claim 2, Peethala et al. teaches (Paragraph 27) a mixing ratio between the hydrofluoric acid and the nitric acid in the oxidative aqueous solution is ina range from 1:1 to 1:10, with higher and lower amounts fully contemplated (Paragraph 28)
Regarding Claims 4 and 6, Peethala et al. teaches the oxidative aqueous solution further includes acetic acid.
Claims 3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2015/0357197 to Peethala et al. in view of US Publication 2018/0269076 to Nanba et al., US Publication 2019/0096730 to Morita et al. and JP 11-195637 to Hasegawa et al.
Regarding Claims 3 and 5, as applied above to Claim 1, Peethala et al. in view of Nanba et al. and Morita et al. teaches the method of the invention substantially as claimed, but does not expressly teach a temperature of the oxidative aqueous solution is in a range from 20°C to 80°C. However, the usable temperature range for silicon etching using acid mixtures is well known in the Prior Art. For example, Hasegawa et al. teaches etching silicon with HNA at a temperature of 20-80°C (Paragraph 18). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to provide a temperature of the oxidative aqueous solution of Peethala et al. in view of Nanba et al. and Morita et al. in a range from 40°C to 80°C in order to provide effective etching rates with predictable results.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US Publication 2019/0091736 to Okutani et al. teaches a processing liquid film forming step including a step of forming the processing liquid film that spreads to a peripheral edge of the pattern forming surface, and the film thinning step including a film removing thinning step of thinning the processing liquid film by removing a portion of the processing liquid, constituting the processing liquid film, from the pattern forming surface after the supply of the processing liquid is stopped
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Roberts P Culbert whose telephone number is (571)272-1433. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday 7:30 AM-6 PM 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, Parviz Hassanzadeh can be reached at 571-272-1435. 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.
/ROBERTS P CULBERT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716