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 .
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 03/26/2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of U.S. PATENT No. 12037667 B2 and U.S. PATENT No. 11028473 B2 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 21 have been considered and are partially persuasive. Xiao is maintained as prior art. The instant Non-Final Rejection replaces the previous Non-Final Rejection mailed on 12/29/2025.
Examiner agrees that “Xiao fails to disclose or suggest step (b) of Claim 1”.
Examiner disagrees that the combination of Xiao and Harada fails to teach the limitation of “wherein a pressure at a space where the substrate is located in (a-1) is set not less than either a pressure at a space where the substrate is located in (a-2) or a pressure at a space where the substrate is located in (b)” (see Page 11 of Applicant’s remarks dated 03/26/2026). Applicant appears to be only comparing the pressure at step (a-1) to the pressure at step (a-2), which is the ligand desorption step. However, the language as recited states that the pressure at (a-1) is set not less than either of (a-2) or (b), not both. Harada teaches a pressure during a process similar to step (b) and therefore teaches the limitation where Xia’s taught pressure at (a-1) is not less than Harda’s taught pressure at (b).
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
As to claim 1, it is unclear if the pressure at (a-1) is set not less than both of (a-2) and (b) or if the pressure at (a-) is set not less than either of (a-2) or (b). For examination purposes, Examiner assumes it is the latter. Proper clarity is required and amended language if necessary.
Claims 2-20 are rejected due to their dependency on claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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.
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.
Claims 1-14, 17-20 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao et al. (US 2013/0323435 A1), hereafter “Xiao”, and further in view of Harada et al. (US 2014/0256156 A1), hereafter “Harada”.
As to claim 1, Xiao teaches a method of processing a substrate, comprising:
(a) forming a seed layer (⁋ [0128], read on by “amorphous or crystalline silicon film”) containing a predetermined element (Silicon) on the substrate by performing a process a predetermined number of times (⁋ [0131], Fig. 4, wherein the process is repeated until the desired thickness is obtained wherein someone familiar with the process would be aware of how many times to repeat the process to obtain the necessary thickness), the process including alternately performing:
(a-1) supplying a first precursor to the substrate (⁋⁋ [0129]-[0130]), where the substrates are placed in the reactor and the precursor is introduced) to form an adsorption layer of the first precursor (⁋ [0092]; “In a typical ALD….chemically adsorb onto the surface of the substrate”), the first precursor containing the predetermined element and a ligand (⁋ [0128], [0130])) and a ligand (⁋ [0130], “organoaminodisilane”) which is coordinated to the predetermined element and which contains at least one selected from the group of carbon and nitrogen (⁋ [0130], various Formulas shown), and
(a-2) supplying a ligand desorption material to the substrate to desorb the ligand from the adsorption layer of the first precursor (⁋ [0131], read on by “reducing agent source”).
Xiao fails to teach (b) supplying a second precursor containing the predetermined element and not containing the ligand to the substrate to form a film containing the predetermined element on the seed layer, wherein a pressure at a space where the substrate is located in (a-1) is set not less than either a pressure at a space where the substrate is located in (a-2) or a pressure at a space where the substrate is located in (b).
Harada teaches a similar process of forming a substrate wherein after the seed layer formation (⁋ [0134]), another precursor (⁋ [0134], SiH4) without a ligand is applied at a pressure of 1 to 1000 Pa (⁋ [0137]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the pressure of the precursor taught by Harada into the method of Xiao because it is possible to improve a film thickness uniformity of the Si film in a plane of the wafer (⁋ [0140]).
Examiner notes that Xiao teaches the first precursor being introduced at 10 mTorr to 760 Torr (⁋ [0043]) which converts to 1.33 Pa to 101,325 Pa resulting in Xiao’s pressure at (a-1_ being not less than the pressure taught by Harada.
As to claim 2, Xiao in view of Harada teaches wherein the ligand desorption material includes a plasma-excited gas (⁋ [0131], hydrogen plasma).
As to claim 3, Xiao in view of Harada teaches wherein the ligand desorption material includes a plasma-excited reducing gas (⁋ [0131], hydrogen plasma).
As to claim 4, Xiao in view of Harada teaches wherein the ligand desorption material includes a plasma-excited hydrogen-containing gas (see claim 3).
As to claim 5, Xiao in view of Harada teaches wherein the ligand desorption material includes a plasma-excited inert gas (⁋ [0083], where hydrogen, H2, is considered an inert gases).
As to claim 6, Xiao in view of Harada teaches wherein the ligand desorption material further includes a halogen-element-containing gas (⁋ [00131], hydrogen chloride, there is no mention that the 3 hydrogen groups cannot be combined).
As to claim 7, Xiao in view of Harada teaches wherein the ligand desorption material further includes a reducing gas (see claim 3).
As to claim 8, Xiao in view of Harada teaches wherein the ligand desorption material further includes a non-plasma-excited reducing gas (⁋ [0083], hydrogen, there is no specification that the 3 hydrogen groups cannot be combined).
As to claim 9, Xiao in view of Harada teaches wherein in (a-2), the plasma-excited inert gas and the non-plasma-excited reducing gas are mixed in the space where the substrate is located and supplied to the substrate (⁋⁋ [0129], [0131]; where it is indicated both the substrate and hydrogen groups are placed into the same reactor).
As to claim 10, Xiao in view of Harada teaches wherein in (a-2), the non-plasma-excited reducing gas is intermittently supplied (as a result of alternating steps, the ligand step would be stopped while other steps are running then continued thus occurring intermittently).
As to claim 11, Xiao in view of Harada teaches wherein in (a-2), the plasma-excited inert gas is intermittently supplied (see claim 9).
As to claim 13, Xiao in view of Harada teaches wherein in (a-2), the non-plasma-excited reducing gas includes at least one selected from the group of hydrogen gas (see claim 8), a deuterium gas, a silicon hydride gas, and a boron hydride gas.
As to claim 17, Xiao in view of Harada teaches wherein in (a-1), an exhaust of the first precursor from the space where the substrate is located is stopped (⁋ [0131], “and the cycle can be repeated until the desired thickness of a film is obtained”; once obtained the exhaust cycle is complete).
As to claim 20, Xiao in view of Harada teaches a method of manufacturing a semiconductor device (⁋ [0052], “semiconductor devices”) comprising the method of claim1.
As to claim 22, Xiao in view of Harada teaches a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a program that causes a computer to perform a process, the process comprising:
(a) forming a seed layer (⁋ [0128], read on by “amorphous or crystalline silicon film”) containing a predetermined element on a substrate (Silicon) by performing a sequence a predetermined number of times (⁋ [0131], Fig. 4, wherein the process is repeated until the desired thickness is obtained wherein someone familiar with the process would be aware of how many times to repeat the process to obtain the necessary thickness), the sequence including alternately performing:
(a-1) supplying a first precursor to the substrate (⁋⁋ [0129]-[0130]), where the substrates are placed in the reactor and the precursor is introduced) to form an adsorption layer of the first precursor (⁋ [0092]; “In a typical ALD….chemically adsorb onto the surface of the substrate”), the first precursor containing the predetermined element and a ligand (⁋ [0128], [0130])) and a ligand (⁋ [0130], “organoaminodisilane”) which is coordinated to the predetermined element and which contains at least one selected from the group of carbon and nitrogen (⁋ [0130], various Formulas shown), and
(a-2) supplying a ligand desorption material to the substrate to desorb the ligand from the adsorption layer of the first precursor (⁋ [0131], read on by “reducing agent source”).
Xiao fails to teach (b) supplying a second precursor containing the predetermined element and not containing the ligand to the substrate to form a film containing the predetermined element on the seed layer, wherein a pressure at a space where the substrate is located in (a-1) is set not less than either a pressure at a space where the substrate is located in (a-2) or a pressure at a space where the substrate is located in (b).
Harada teaches a similar process of forming a substrate wherein after the seed layer formation (⁋ [0134]), another precursor (⁋ [0134], SiH4) without a ligand is applied at a pressure of 1 to 1000 Pa (⁋ [0137]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the pressure of the precursor taught by Harada into the method of Xiao because it is possible to improve a film thickness uniformity of the Si film in a plane of the wafer (⁋ [0140]).
Examiner notes that Xiao teaches the first precursor being introduced at 10 mTorr to 760 Torr (⁋ [0043]) which converts to 1.33 Pa to 101,325 Pa resulting in Xiao’s pressure at (a-1_ being not less than the pressure taught by Harada.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao in view of Harada, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Tabata et al. (US 2014/0123897 A1), hereafter “Tabata”.
As to claim 12, Xiao in view of Harada teaches the plasma-excited inert gas is intermittently supplied (see claim 9) but fails to teach wherein in (a-2), the plasma-excited inert gas is intermittently plasma-excited.
Tabata teaches a plasma generation apparatus where a plasma excited gas is supplied (⁋ [0114], “the plasma excitation gas is generated from the supplied inert gas of oxygen, nitrogen, or the like”) and is intermittently plasma-excited (⁋ [0187]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the inert gas intermittent plasma-excitation of Tabata into the method of Xiao in view of Harada to yield a plasma excitation gas having an extremely high chemical reactivity is generated in the plasma generation apparatus (⁋ [0187]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao in view of Harada, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Hirose et al. (US 2013/0149874 A1), hereafter “Hirose”.
As to claim 14, Xiao in view of Harada teaches wherein the pressure at the space where the substrate is located in (a-1) is set not less than the pressure at the space where the substrate is located in (b) (see claim 1).
Xiao in view of Harada fails to teach wherein the pressure at the space where the substrate is located in (a-1) is not less than the pressure at the space where the substrate is located in (a-2).
Hirose teaches a similar process of forming a substrate wherein a reducing gas (⁋ [0061], “hydrogen”) is at a pressure of 1 to 3,000 Pa (⁋ [0137]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the pressure at the reducing agent step taught by Hirose with the method of Xiao and Harada to thermally activate the H.sub.2 gas and perform oxidation (⁋ [0137]).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao in view of Harada, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Hirose et al. (US 2013/0252439 A1), hereafter “Hirose ‘439”.
As to claim 15, Xiao in view of Harada fail to teach wherein a supply flow rate of the first precursor in (a-1) is set not less than an exhaust flow rate of the first precursor exhausted from the space where the substrate is located in (a-1).
Hirose ‘439 teaches a similar method of processing a substrate wherein a flow rate of a gases supplied into the process chamber may be greater than an exhaust flow rate of a gas exhausted via the exhaust line (⁋ [0087]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the teaching of a gas supply rate being supplied at a higher flow rate than an exhaust flow rate as taught by Hirose ‘439 within the method of Xiao and Harada to rapidly raise the pressure in the process chamber within a short time period (⁋ [0087]). One skilled in the art would find benefit of quickly raising the pressure in a process chamber as it would accelerate the chemical reactions, shorten the time it takes to complete the process and ultimately increase the production output.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao in view of Harada, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Hirose ‘439 and Nakaiso et al. (US 2009/0258504 A1), hereafter “Nakaiso”.
As to claim 16, Xiao in view of Harada fail to teach fail to teach wherein in (a-1), the first precursor is exhausted from the space where the substrate is located while supplying the first precursor into the space, and at this time, a supply flow rate of the first precursor supplied into the space is set not less than an exhaust flow rate of the first precursor exhausted from the space.
Hirose ‘439 teaches a similar method of processing a substrate wherein a flow rate of a gases supplied into the process chamber may be greater than an exhaust flow rate of a gas exhausted via the exhaust line (⁋ [0087]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the teaching of a gas supply rate being supplied at a higher flow rate than an exhaust flow rate as taught by Hirose ‘439 within the method of Xiao and Harada to rapidly raise the pressure in the process chamber within a short time period (⁋ [0087]). One skilled in the art would find benefit of quickly raising the pressure in a process chamber as it would accelerate the chemical reactions, shorten the time it takes to complete the process and ultimately increase the production output.
Xiao modified by Harada and Hirose ‘439 fail to teach the first precursor is exhausted from the space where the substrate is located while supplying the first precursor into the space.
Nakaiso teaches a similar method of processing a substrate wherein a flow rate of a gas (N2) is supplied while also being exhausted through a slow exhaust (⁋ [0134]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the teaching of simultaneously supplying and exhausting a gas in a space as taught by Nakaiso to the method of Xiao, Harada and Hirose ‘439 for the benefit of preventing backflow of byproducts along the inside of piping or adhesion of the byproducts to the inside of the piping (⁋ [0134]). The prevention of backflow would also prevention contamination and further unforeseen chemical reaction outcomes further down the processing line.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao in view of Harada, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Obu et al. (US 2014/0187024 A1), hereafter “Obu”.
As to claim 18, Xizo in view of Harada fail to disclose wherein (a-1) is performed under a condition in which the first precursor is not pyrolyzed, and (b) is performed under a condition in which the second precursor is pyrolyzed.
Obu teaches a method of forming a seed layer and wherein a DIPAS is performed under a condition in which it is decomposed (pyrolyzed) (⁋ [0206]). Obu also teaches after formation of the first seed layer, a second seed layer is formed by thermal decomposition (⁋ [0134]) of disilane.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the pyrolyzing of the DIPAS as taught by Obu into the method of Xiao in view of Harada to prevent the impurities from being introduced into the formed film (⁋ [0206]).
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the non-pyrolyzing of the disilane as taught by Obu into the method of Xiao in view of Harada so that the silicon film is formed (⁋ [0134]).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao in view of Harada, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Son (US 2006/0154453 A1), hereafter “Son”.
As to claim 19, Xiao in view of Harada does not teach wherein an insulation film is formed on a surface of the substrate, and the seed layer is formed on the insulation film.
Son teaches a similar process of forming a seed layer with an insulation pattern formed on a substrate and a seed layer containing silicon formed on top (⁋ [0019]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the insulation film as taught by Son with the method taught by Xiao in view of Harada in order to prevent the native oxide layer from forming on the underlying layer (⁋ [0012]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARNELL HUNTER whose telephone number is (571)270-1796. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am - 4:30pm.
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, Sue Purvis can be reached on 571-272-1236. 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.
/CARNELL HUNTER III/Examiner, Art Unit 2893 /SUE A PURVIS/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights