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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. Claims 1-4, 6-10, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Aminpur (US 6,482,726 B1).
As to claim 1, Aminpur discloses an etching method, comprising:
forming a metal oxide layer (540) comprising a barium titanate layer or a strontium titanate layer over a substrate (col. 5 lines 40-51; Fig 5);
forming a patterned masking layer (560 or 570) over the metal oxide layer (col. 6 lines 1-20; Fig 5);
performing an anisotropic dry etching process to etch the metal oxide layer in regions not covered by the patterned masking layer (col. 6 lines 21-40; Fig 6-7); and
performing an isotropic wet etching process to remove residual materials not removed by the anisotropic dry etching process and to form a patterned metal oxide layer (650 and/or 740) (col. 6 lines 41-55, Fig 7).
As to claim 2, Aminpur discloses the isotropic wet etching process forms undercut etched regions in the metal oxide layer (740) under portions of the patterned masking layer (See Fig 7, col. 6 lines 41 to col. 7 line 8).
As to claim 3, Aminpur discloses the anisotropic dry etching process comprises one or more of reactive ion etching (RIE) (col. 6 lines 30-40).
As to claim 4, Aminpur discloses the anisotropic dry etching process uses at least one etchant material comprising Ar, C4F8, CF4, or CHF3 (col. 6 lines 30-40).
As to claim 6, Aminpur discloses the anisotropic dry etching process comprises a dry plasma etching process (col. 6 lines 30-40).
As to claim 7, Aminpur discloses the isotropic wet etching process uses at least one etchant material comprising phosphoric acid (col. 6 lines 45-55).
As to claim 8, Aminpur discloses the residual materials comprises at least one of barium or strontium compound (col. 5 lines 45-52, col. 6 lines 40-55).
As to claim 9, Aminpur discloses the patterned masking layer comprises photoresist (col. 6 lines 1-21).
As to claim 10, Aminpur discloses removing the patterned masking layer (570) before performing the isotropic wet etching process (col. 6 lines 41-45).
As to claim 16, Aminpur the step of forming the metal oxide layer comprises forming the strontium titanate layer over a substrate and forming the barium titanate layer over the strontium titanate layer (col. 5 lines 40-52).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aminpur (US 6,482,726 B1) as applied to claims 1-4, 6-10, 16 above, and further in view of Tada et al. (US 2009/0071404 A1).
As to claim 5, Aminpur fails to disclose wherein the at least one etchant material further comprises at least one of 02, H2, He, N2, CO, or mixtures thereof. However, Aminpur clearly teaches to etch barium titanate or strontium titanate using Ar, C4F8, CF4, or CHF3 (col. 6 lines 30-40). Tada teaches to etch barium strontium titanate (BST) using etchant comprises H2, and/or O2 gas, and inert gas such as He (paragraph 0076, Tada’s claim 10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Aminpur in view of Tad by using at least one etchant comprises at least one of O2, H2 or He because equivalent and substitution of one for the other would produce an expected result (See MPEP 2143(I)(B)).
8. Claims 11, 13, 15, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aminpur (US 6,482,726 B1) as applied to claims 1-4, 6-10, 16 above, and further in view of Wu et al. (US 2019/0157387 A1).
Note:
As to claim 11, Aminpur discloses the patterned metal oxide (740) layer contains a ridge portion having portion over the substrate (See Fig 7-8). As to claim 11, Aminpur fails to disclose that the sidewall is tapered. Wu discloses the patterned metal oxide layer contains a ridge portion having tapered sidewalls and horizontal layer portions located on each side of the ridge portion over the substrate (paragraph 0031, Fig 4A). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Aminpur in view of Wu by having metal oxide layer contains a ridge portion having a tapered sidewall because tapering can be attributed to etching process or etchant used to perform the metal gate cut (See paragraph 0031).
As to claim 13, Aminpur discloses the metal oxide layer comprises the barium titanate layer (col. 5 lines 40-52).
As to claim 15, Aminpur discloses the metal oxide layer comprises the strontium titanate layer (col. 5 lines 40-52).
As to claim 17, Aminpur disclose the patterned metal oxide comprises a barium titanate ridge portion having .
9. Claims 12, 14, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aminpur (US 6,482,726 B1) and Wu (US 2019/0157387 A1) as applied to claim 11, 13, 15, 17 above, and further in view of Ma (US 2018/0081204 A1).
As to claim 12, Aminpur and Wu fail to disclose the patterned metal oxide layer comprises a waveguide layer of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer. However, Aminpur clear teaches to form patterned metal oxide layer. Ma discloses to form a patterned metal oxide layer comprises a waveguide layer of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer (paragraph 0024, 0055, 0067, 0069, 0072-0073, Fig 5, Fig 9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Aminpur and Wu in view of Ma by having a patterned metal oxide layer comprises a waveguide layer of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer because equivalent and substitution of one for the other would produce an expected result (See MPEP 2143(I)(B)).
As to claim 14, Aminpur and Wu fails to disclose forming a first electrode and a second electrode on the horizontal layer portions. Ma discloses forming a first electrode and a second electrode on the horizontal layer portions (abstract, paragraph, 0013, 0025-0026, 0033-0035). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Aminpur and Wu in view of Ma by forming a first electrode and a second electrode on the horizontal layer portions because the first electrode and the second electrode establish the first cladding portion and the second cladding portion of the waveguide (paragraph 0033-0034).
As to claim 18, Aminpur and Wu fail to disclose the barium titanate ridge portion comprises a waveguide layer of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer. However, Aminpur clear teaches to form the barium titanate ridge portion (col. 5 lines 40-52). Ma discloses to form a barium titanate (BaTiO3) ridge comprises a waveguide layer of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer (paragraph 0024, 0055, 0067, 0069, 0072-0074, Fig 5, Fig 9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Aminpur and Wu in view of Ma by having a patterned metal oxide layer comprises a waveguide layer of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer because equivalent and substitution of one for the other would produce an expected result (See MPEP 2143(I)(B)).
10. Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aminpur et al. (US 6,482,726) in view of Rauf et al. (US 2007/0166973 A1).
As to claim 19, Aminpur discloses An etching method, comprising:
forming a metal oxide layer (540) comprising a barium titanate layer or a strontium titanate layer over a substrate (col. 5 lines 40-51; Fig 5);
forming a patterned masking layer (560 or 570) over the metal oxide layer col. 6 lines 1-20; Fig 5);
performing a first anisotropic dry etching process to etch the metal oxide layer in regions not covered by the patterned masking layer (col. 6 lines 21-40; Fig 6-7).
As to claim 19, Aminpur fails to disclose performing a second anisotropic dry etching process having a higher ion bombardment than the first anisotropic dry etching process to remove residual materials not removed by the first anisotropic dry etching process and to form a patterned metal oxide layer. Rauf discloses performing a second anisotropic dry etching process having a higher ion bombardment than the first anisotropic dry etching process to remove residual materials not removed by the first anisotropic dry etching process and to form a patterned metal oxide layer (Fig 7, Fig 10, paragraph 0024-0027). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Aminpur in view of Rauf by performing a second anisotropic dry etching process having a higher ion bombardment than the first anisotropic dry etching process to remove residual materials not removed by the first anisotropic dry etching process and to form a patterned metal oxide layer because it helps to reduce metal foot or ledge feature (paragraph 0027).
As to claim 19, Aminpur discloses patterned masking layer comprises photoresist, and the residual materials comprise at least one of a barium or strontium compound (col. 5 lines 45-52; col. 6 lines 1-21).
Conclusion
11. 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