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 in the reply filed on May 18, 2026, is acknowledged.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the “Brief Description of the Drawings” at paragraph [0031] fails to individually describe each of Figure 5 through Figure 10. Please provide a brief description of these drawings. MPEP 608.01(f).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 and 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shen et al (US 2017/0365487 A1).
Shen discloses an etching gas composition comprising:
an organic fluorine compound (hydrofluorocarbon, e.g., 1,1,1,3,3,3-hexafluoropropane [0190]; hydrofluorocarbon etching gas [0221]); and
carbon disulfide [0224].
As to claim 2, Shen discloses that the content of the second etch gas, which in one embodiment comprises carbon disulfide, is 0.01%v/v to 99.99% v/v, [0232]. This range encompasses the cited range.
As to claim 3, Shen discloses that the organic fluorine compound comprises three carbon atoms, as cited (see rejection of claim 1).
As to claims 9-10, Shen discloses that the etching composition further comprises an inert gas (such as argon [0225]); and a reactive gas (such as oxygen O2 [0222]).
As to claim 11, Shen discloses an etching gas composition comprising:
an organic fluorine compound having three carbon atoms as cited (hydrofluorocarbon, e.g., 1,1,1,3,3,3-hexafluoropropane [0190]; hydrofluorocarbon etching gas [0221]), which is within the cited range;
carbon disulfide [0224];
an inert gas (such as argon [0225]); and
a reactive gas (such as oxygen O2 [0222]).
As to claim 12, Shen discloses that the content of the second etch gas, which in one embodiment comprises carbon disulfide, is 0.01%v/v to 99.99% v/v, [0232]. This range encompasses the cited range.
As to claim 13, Shen discloses that the organic fluorine compound comprises C3F6 (see rejection of claim 11).
As to claim 14, Shen discloses 1,1,2,2,3,3-hexafluoropropane [0190].
Claims 1-4, 7-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Anderson et al (US 2015/0294880 A1).
Anderson discloses an etching gas composition comprising:
an organic fluorine compound (e.g., 1,1,1,4,4,4-hexafluoro-2-butene [0127] and its isomer (trans, cis, [0127]; hexafluoroisobutene [0127]); and
carbon disulfide [0151].
As to claim 2, Anderson discloses that the content of the additional etching gas, which in one embodiment comprises carbon disulfide, is 0.01%v/v to 99.99% v/v, [0151]. This range encompasses the cited range.
As to claim 3, Anderson discloses that the organic fluorine compound comprises four carbon atoms, as cited (see rejection of claim 1).
As to claim 4, Anderson discloses that both a 3-carbon (see rejection of claim 1) and a 4-carbon organic fluorine compound may be included in the etching gas composition, as cited (C4F6, [0151]).
As to claims 7-8, Anderson discloses at least two isomers as cited, [0127], see rejection of claim 1.
As to claims 9-10, Anderson discloses that the etching composition further comprises an inert gas (such as argon [0146]); and a reactive gas (such as oxygen O2 [0150]).
As to claim 11, Anderson discloses an etching gas composition comprising:
an organic fluorine compound having four carbon atoms (e.g., 1,1,1,4,4,4-hexafluoro-2-butene [0127] and its isomer (trans, cis, [0127]; hexafluoroisobutene [0127]), which is within the cited range;
carbon disulfide [0151];
an inert gas (such as argon [0146]); and
a reactive gas (such as oxygen O2 [0150]).
As to claim 12, Anderson discloses that the content of the additional etching gas, which in one embodiment comprises carbon disulfide, is 0.01%v/v to 99.99% v/v, [0151]. This range encompasses the cited range.
As to claim 13, Anderson discloses that the etching composition may comprise CF4, C4F6, C4F8 [0151].
As to claim 15, Anderson discloses hexafluoroisobutene [0127].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anderson et al (US 2015/0294880 A1), as applied to claim 4, and further in view of Shen et al (US 2017/0365487 A1).
As to claim 5, Anderson fails to disclose at least two isomers of an organic fluorine compound having 3 carbon atoms.
Anderson discloses that the hydrofluorocarbon etching gases deposit a polymer passivation layer to improve etching profiles [0140].
The discussion of Shen from above is repeated here. Shen teaches that the etching composition may comprise isomers of 1,1,2,2,3,3-hexafluoropropane [0190] as a hydrofluorocarbon component of an etching gas [0190]. Shen teaches that the hydrofluorocarbon etching gases deposit a polymer passivation layer to improve etching profiles [0202]. Accordingly, both Anderson and Shen include hydrofluorocarbons to improve etching profiles.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide two isomers such as of 1,1,2,2,3,3-hexafluoropropane in the composition of Anderson because Shen teaches that they are useful for controlling the etch profile, which Anderson already recognizes as desirable, and such is expected to give the predictable result of an improved etching profile.
As to claim 6, see the rejection of claim 5 which teaches isomers of 1,1,2,2,3,3-hexafluoropropane.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Guo et al (US 2025/0379062 A1) is cited to show carbon disulfide and hydrofluorocarbon etch gases [0258], [0276], inert gas [0268], and oxidizer [0274].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANITA K ALANKO whose telephone number is (571)270-0297. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9 am-5pm.
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.
/ANITA K ALANKO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713
Prosecution Insights