DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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 Amendment
2. This office action is responsive to applicant’s amendment filed on 08/04/2026. Claims 13-17, 19, 21-32 are pending. Claims 13, 16, 30-31 are amended. Claims 1-12, 18, 20 are cancelled. Claim 32 is new claim.
The applicant’s amendment with respect to claim 13 along with the remark were sufficient to overcome the examiner’s previous ground of rejection. Claim 13 is allowed. Claims 14-17, 24-29 are allowed because they directly or indirectly depend on allowed claim 13. New ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C 112(b) were set forth as discussed below for claims 21-23 because applicants try to broaden dependent or provide contradicted limitation in claims 21-23.
Amended claims 30-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as discussed below using additional new cited prior arts, Blomberg (US 2018/0182597 A1), along with previous cited prior art Clark et al. (US 2019/0267249).
New claim 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 102(a)(1) and/or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Clark et al. (US 2019/0267249 A1).
Response to Arguments
3. The applicant’s amendment along with the remark were sufficient to overcome the examiner’s ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C 112(b) with respect to claims 30-31. However, applicant’s amendment raise new ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C 112(b) with respect to claims 21-23 as discussed below.
Regarding to previous ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C 102(a)(1) and/or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Clark et al. (US 2019/0267248) with respect to claim 13, the applicants stated:
“Without commenting on the merits of the rejection and solely to advance prosecution, Applicant has amended claim 13 to specify that the material to be etched is a metal oxide comprising Si, Ge, In, Se, Te, Ga, and Sb. None of the cited references describes a material to be etched that is a metal oxide comprising Si, Ge, In, Se, Te, Ga, and Sb, as recited in claim 13 as amended.”
The applicant’s amendment with respect to claim 13 along with the remark were sufficient to overcome the examiner’s previous 35 U.S.C 102(a)(1) and/or 102(a)(2). Claim 13 is allowed. Claims 14-17, 19, 24-29 are allowed because they directly or indirectly depend on allowed claim 13. New ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C 112(b) were set forth as discussed below for claims 21-23 because applicants try to broaden dependent claims 21-22 or provide a new contradicted limitation with respect to previous independent claim 13 as recited in claim 23.
As to new claim 32, applicants stated:
“Claim 32 is directed to a method that involves exposing the material to be etched to a halogen-containing gas at a first temperature to form a modified layer on a surface of the wafer, and exposing the modified layer to boron-and-chlorine-containing gas at a second temperature to remove the modified layer from the surface of the wafer.
Applicant respectfully submits that Woods does not describe a temperature at which any operation is performed. Moreover, while Clark mentions a low temperature thermal ALE, Clark does not describe exposing a material to be etched to a halogen-containing gas at a first temperature, or exposing a modified layer to a boron-and-chlorine-containing gas at a second temperature. Applicant respectfully submits that new claim 32 is allowable over the cited references.”
The examiner disagrees. Clark clearly discloses exposing a material to be etched to a halogen-containing gas at a first temperature, and exposing a modified layer to a boron-and-chlorine-containing gas at a second temperature (See Fig 2 step 202, Fig 6, Fig 7; paragraph 0018, 0021-0022) since the first temperature and the second temperature can be any temperature. There is no limitation in claim 32 which recited the relationship between the first temperature and the second temperature.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
5. Claim 21-23 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.
Claim 21 depends on claim 13. in claim 13 line 3, applicants recite “wherein the material to be etched is a metal oxide comprising Si, Ge, In, Se, Te, Ga, and Sb” (emphasis added). The examiner interprets this limitation means that the material to be etched is a metal oxide comprises Si, Ge, In, Se, Te, Ga, and Sb (i.e. metal oxide comprises all recited elements Si, Ge, In, Se, Te, Ga, and Sb). However, in claim 21 applicants try to broaden the claim by reciting “the material to be etched comprises an oxygen-containing material”. The phrase “an oxygen-containing material” in claim 21 is much broader than “a metal oxide comprising Si, Ge, In, Se, Te, Ga, and Sb”. Once the applicants narrow the material to be etched is a metal oxide comprising Si, Ge, In, Se, Te, Ga, and Sb in independent claim 21, applicants cannot broaden the dependent claim by reciting “the material to be etched comprises an oxygen-containing material”. It is unclear whether any oxygen-containing material such as sodium oxide, potassium oxide or carbon dioxide, iron oxide can be used or not for the material to be etched as recited in claim 21.
Claim 22 indirectly depends on claim 13. in claim 13 line 3, applicants recite “wherein the material to be etched is a metal oxide comprising Si, Ge, In, Se, Te, Ga, and Sb”. The examiner interprets this limitation means that the material to be etched is a metal oxide comprises Si, Ge, In, Se, Te, Ga, and Sb (i.e. metal oxide comprises all recited elements Si, Ge, In, Se, Te, Ga, and Sb). However, in claim 22 applicants try to broaden the claim by reciting “the oxygen-containing material is selected from the group consisting of zirconium oxide, hafnium oxide and hafnium zirconium oxide”. It is noted that “zirconium oxide, hafnium oxide and hafnium zirconium oxide” is not part of “a metal oxide comprising Si, Ge, In, Se, Te, Ga, and Sb”. Once the applicants narrow the material to be etched is a metal oxide comprising Si, Ge, In, Se, Te, Ga, and Sb in independent claim 21, applicants cannot broaden the dependent claim by reciting “the oxygen-containing material is selected from the group consisting of zirconium oxide, hafnium oxide and hafnium zirconium oxide”. It is unclear whether the oxygen-containing material is selected from the group consisting of zirconium oxide, hafnium oxide and hafnium zirconium oxide” is required or not because it is not part of the original metal oxide comprises Si, Ge, In, Se, Te, Ga, and Sb as recited in claim 13.
Claim 23 depends on claim 13. in claim 13 line 3, applicants recite “wherein the material to be etched is a metal oxide comprising Si, Ge, In, Se, Te, Ga, and Sb”. The examiner interprets this limitation means that the material to be etched is a metal oxide comprises Si, Ge, In, Se, Te, Ga, and Sb (i.e. metal oxide comprises all recited elements Si, Ge, In, Se, Te, Ga, and Sb). However, in claim 23 applicants provide a contradicted limitation “wherein the material to be etched is a carbide or nitride formed by oxidizing the carbide or nitride”. It is noted that the is a metal oxide comprising Si, Ge, In, Se, Te, Ga, and Sb as recited in claim 13 cannot be formed to carbide or nitride by oxidizing process. It is unclear whether the material to be etched as recited in claim 23 is a metal carbide or metal nitride or not because the metal oxide as recited in claim 13 cannot convert to metal nitride or metal carbide by using an oxidizing process.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
7. 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
8. Claim 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Clark et al. (US 2019/0267249 A1).
As to claim 32, Clark discloses a method for processing wafers, the method comprising:
providing a wafer to a processing chamber, the wafer having a material to be etched (Fig 2 step 200);
exposing the material to be etched to a halogen-containing gas (HF) at a first temperature to form a modified layer on a surface of the wafer (Fig 2 step 202, Fig 6, Fig 7; paragraph 0018, 0021-0022 Note: first temperature is any temperature); and
exposing the modified layer to boron-and-chlorine-containing gas at a second temperature to remove the modified layer from the surface of the wafer (See Fig 2 step 206, Fig 6-7; paragraph 0018, 0021-0022; Note: second temperature is any temperature).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. Claims 30-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark et al. .
(US 2019/0267249 A1) in view of Blomberg et al. (US 2018/0182597 A1).
Note:
As to claim 30, Clark discloses A method for processing wafers, the method comprising:
providing a wafer to a processing chamber, the wafer having an oxygen-containing material (Fig 2, step 200, Fig 6-7, paragraph 0018);
and performing an etch cycle to remove
exposing the oxygen-containing material to a halogen-containing gas to form a modified oxygen-containing layer on a surface of the wafer (Fig 2 step 20, Fig 6-7; paragraph 0018, 0021-0022) and
exposing the modified oxygen-containing layer to boron trichloride to remove the modified oxygen-containing layer from the surface of the wafer (Fig 2 step 20, Fig 6-7; paragraph 0018, 0021-0022).
As to claim 30, Clark fails to disclose an etch cycle to remove 1 Å to 50 Å of the oxygen-containing material. Blomberg discloses an etch cycle to remove more than 1 Å/cycle, or more than 2 Å/cycle, or more than 3 Å/cycle, or more than 10 Å/cycle or more than 20 Å/cycle of the oxygen-0contaiing material (See paragraph 0144-0147, within applicant’s range of1 Å to 50 Å ). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Clark in view of Blomberg by having an etch cycle to remove 1 Å to 50 Å of the oxygen-containing material because in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (See MPEP 2144.05(I)).
As to claim 31, Clark disclose wherein exposing the modified oxygen- containing layer is performed in a plasma-less environment (paragraph 0018).
Allowable Subject Matter
12. Claims 13-17, 19, 24-29 are allowed.
13. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The cited prior arts fail to disclose or suggest the wafer having a material to be etched, wherein the material to be etched is a metal oxide comprising Si, Ge, In, Se, Te, Ga, and Sb;
exposing the material to be etched to a halogen-containing gas to form a modified layer on a surface of the wafer; and
exposing the modified layer to boron-and-chlorine-containing gas to remove the modified layer from the surface of the wafer.
Conclusion
14. 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.
15. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BINH X TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1469. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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.
BINH X. TRAN
Examiner
Art Unit 1713
/BINH X TRAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713
Prosecution Insights