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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, as to the point that none of the applied prior art, Shi et and Li et al disclose the composition is free of inorganic abrasive particles as required in the currently amended claim 1, have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claim(s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shi et al (US 2020/0277514) in view of Penta et al (US 2012/0190200).
Regarding claim 1, Shi et al disclose a chemical mechanical polishing (CMP) composition comprise solvent, abrasive, oxidizer, at least two chelators selected from the group consisting of amino acids, amino acid derivatives, organic amine, and combinations therefore; wherein at least one chelator is an amino acid or an amino acid derivative. Organic quaternary ammonium salt, corrosion inhibitor, pH adjustor and biocide can be used in the compositions (abstract; [0027]-[0036]); and aforesaid “amino acid” reads on the claimed “organic booster” as the amino acid comprises tyrosine, glutamine, asparanine, glutamic acid, aspartic acid, tryptophan, histidine, arginine, lysine, methionine, cysteine, iminodiacetic acid, etc. [0153]; and at least tryptophan has nonpolar side chain that repel water.
Shi et al disclose that the composition contains 0.0025 wt. % to 25 wt. % abrasives [0133]; and aforesaid lowest amount of 0.0025 wt% is very negligible amount of abrasive BUT fail to teach the composition is free of abrasive particles.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Penta et al disclose a chemical mechanical planarization method uses a chemical mechanical planarization composition that includes at least one nitrogen containing material and a pH adjusting material, absent an abrasive material [0009];
Penta et al also disclose that an abrasive free chemical mechanical planarization composition in accordance with the embodiments and an abrasive free chemical mechanical planarization method in accordance with the embodiments may also provide superior performance within the context of eliminating contaminants, mobile ions, various defects, scratches and structural damage (i.e., such as but not limited to dishing) of planarized features that may be caused by abrasives [0034].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ Penta et al's teaching of not to use abrasive particles, in other words, a composition absents of abrasive particle into the teaching of Shi et al for achieving superior performance as suggested by Penta et al [0034].
Shi et al disclose that the composition comprises water [0017].
Shi et al remain silent that the water is deionized water (DIW).
However, Penta et al disclose a CMP composition comprises deionized water [0042].
Regarding claim 8, the modified teaching discloses above for the claim 1 and the limitations in claim 1 are similar in nature (see the rejection for claim 1).
Regarding claims 2 and 9, Shi et al disclose that the pH of the composition is from 3.0 to 12.0 [0021],[0148].
Regarding claims 3 and 10, Shi et al disclose that the CMP composition contains 0.1 wt. % to 18 wt. % (equates 1000 ppm to 180,000 ppm) of at least two chelators (reads on the organic booster) [0149], which overlaps the claimed range of 10 ppm to 20,000 ppm; and overlapping ranges are prima facie obvious, see MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claims 4 and 11, Shi et al disclose that the amino acid (organic booster) comprises tyrosine, glutamine, asparanine, glutamic acid, aspartic acid, tryptophan, histidine, arginine, lysine, methionine, cysteine, iminodiacetic acid, etc. [0153].
Regarding claims 5 and 12, Shi et al disclose that the CMP composition is configured to polish/etch copper (cu) film [0022].
Regarding claims 6-7 and 13-14, regarding the protrusion of a copper film, the protrusion height and the static etch rate could have been achieved by the CMP composition taught by Shi et al in view of Li et al because it has all the components as the claimed composition and which is capable of performing such etching as an intended use of such composition. The recitation of a new intended use for an old product does not make a claim to that old product patentable. In re Schreiber, 44 USPQ2d 1429 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
Additionally, a composition claim covers what the composition is not what the composition does. See In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 708, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1657 (Fed. Cir. 1990) ("The discovery of a new property or use of a previously known composition, even when that property and use are unobvious from prior art, cannot impart patentability to claims to the known composition."); and "the discovery of a previously unappreciated property of a prior composition, or of a scientific explanation for the prior art's functioning, does not render the old composition patentably new to the discoverer." Atlas Powder Co. v. Ireco Inc., 190 F.3d 1342, 1347, 51 USPQ2d 1943, 1947 (Fed. Cir. 1999).
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 SHAMIM AHMED whose telephone number is (571)272-1457. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH (8-5:30pm).
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.
SHAMIM AHMED
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1713
/SHAMIM AHMED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713
Prosecution Insights