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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-16 and 18-21 are pending after preliminary amendment, which cancelled Claim 17, dated July 10th, 2025, was filed in response to Petition Decision dated June 17th, 2025.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) filed on April 26th, 2024, May 22nd, 2025, and July 10th, 2025, are being considered by the Examiner.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details. More specifically, the abstract filed on April 26th, 2024, is not written in narrative form as it is a recitation of an independent claim in one run-on sentence. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-16 and 18-21 are objected to for the following reasons. Claims 1-16 and 18-21 refer to “a first layer”, but the specification does not define “a first layer” during the microfabrication process. Rather, the specification appears to refer to “a base layer” in place of “a first layer”. Pursuant to MPEP 2173.03 and 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1), correspondence between specification and claims is required. Appropriate correction is deemed to be required in order to correct the correspondence issue. For the purposes of compact prosecution and a complete record, Examiner shall interpret “a first layer” as being equivalent to “a base layer” as defined in the specification.
Additionally, Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities and/or typographical errors:
a) “become insoluble” should read “becomes insoluble”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-16 and 18-20 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 1 recites the following limitation, “(e) developing the first resist using the first developer such that a relief pattern comprising openings is formed, wherein the openings expose the features of the existing layer” in lines 11-12 of said claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as “the existing layer” has not been previously defined. More specifically, it is unclear to the Examiner whether “the existing layer” is in reference to the first layer, the existing patterns, or to any of the other limitations which could be construed as a layer existing after development of the first resist. For the purposes of compact prosecution, the Examiner will interpret “the existing layer” as “the first layer”.
Claims 2-16 and 18-20 are rejected due to their dependence upon a previously rejected claim, (i.e., Claim 1).
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of Claim 14 of prior U.S. Patent No. 12547072 as more thoroughly shown in the below table. This is a statutory double patenting rejection.
Instant Application
US Patent No. 12547072
21. A method of microfabrication, the method comprising: receiving a substrate having features formed within a first layer such that a top surface of the substrate has the features uncovered and the first layer uncovered;
14. A method of microfabrication, the method comprising: receiving a substrate having features formed within a first layer such that a top surface of the substrate has the features uncovered and the first layer uncovered;
depositing a first solubility-shifting agent on the substrate, the first solubility-shifting agent selected so that the first solubility-shifting agent adheres to uncovered surfaces of the features without adhering to uncovered surfaces of the first layer;
depositing a first solubility-shifting agent on the substrate, the first solubility-shifting agent selected so that the first solubility-shifting agent adheres to uncovered surfaces of the features without adhering to uncovered surfaces of the first layer;
depositing a second solubility-shifting agent on the substrate, the second solubility-shifting agent selected so that the second solubility-shifting agent adheres to the uncovered surfaces of the first layer without adhering to uncovered surfaces of the features;
depositing a second solubility-shifting agent on the substrate, the second solubility-shifting agent selected so that the second solubility-shifting agent adheres to the uncovered surfaces of the first layer without adhering to uncovered surfaces of the features;
depositing a first photoresist on the substrate;
depositing a first photoresist on the substrate;
activating the first solubility-shifting agent sufficient to cause regions of the first photoresist above the features to become soluble to a particular developer;
activating the first solubility-shifting agent sufficient to cause regions of the first photoresist above the features to become soluble to a particular developer;
activating the second solubility-shifting agent such that the second solubility-shifting agent increases insolubility of the first photoresist above the first layer;
activating the second solubility-shifting agent such that the second solubility-shifting agent increases insolubility of the first photoresist above the first layer;
developing the first photoresist resulting in a relief pattern that defines openings that uncover the features;
developing the first photoresist resulting in a relief pattern that defines openings that uncover the features;
and executing a selective growth process that grows a selective-deposition material on the features and within the defined openings of the relief pattern resulting in self-aligned selective deposition features.
and executing a selective growth process that grows a selective-deposition material on the features and within the defined openings of the relief pattern resulting in self-aligned selective deposition features.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-16 and 18-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. The following is an Examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance.
Regarding Claim 1, the closest prior art of record, Guillot, et al. (EP 3454122 A1) discloses a method of microfabrication ([Abstract]) comprising:
(a) providing a substrate (substrate 1, [0009], Fig. 6) having an existing pattern (metallization layer 5, Fig. 6; the portion of metallization layer 5 that rests on top of resin layer 3 would be analogous to existing patterns), wherein the existing pattern comprises features formed within a first layer (metallization layer 5 (in the portions not disposed on top of resin layer 3), Fig. 6) such that a top surface of the substrate has the features uncovered and the first layer is uncovered (Fig. 6);
(c) depositing a first resist on the substrate (photosensitive resin layer 6, [0018], Fig. 7);
(e) developing the first resist using the first developer such that a relief pattern comprising openings is formed, wherein the openings expose the features of the existing layer ([0023], Fig. 10; the irradiation of the photosensitive resin layer [first resist] is analogous to developing the first resist);
(f) executing a selective growth process that grows a selective growth material on the features and within the openings of the relief pattern to provide self-aligned selective growth features ([0025], Fig. 11).
Guillot, et al. fails to disclose the following limitations:
(b) depositing a selective attachment agent on the substrate, wherein the selective attachment agent attaches to the features and comprises a solubility-shifting agent (Guillot, et al. discloses that the solubility of the first resist layer is done using UV radiation ([0022], Fig. 9) and not with a selective attachment agent comprising a solubility-shifting agent);
(d) activating the solubility-shifting agent such that a portion of the first resist over the features becomes soluble to a first developer or a portion of the first resist over the first layer between the features become insoluble to a first developer (As Guillot, et al. does not disclose a solubility-shifting agent, but rather uses UV radiation, this limitation is further undisclosed);
(g) removing the first resist;
(h) depositing a fill layer on the substrate to provide a filled substrate; and
(i) repeating steps (b) - (h) a predetermined number of times to provide a stacked device comprising a predetermined number of levels (Guillot, et al. does not disclose repeating this process in order to produce a stacked device).
Furthermore, none of the cited prior art of record, taken alone or in combination of one another, discloses or renders obvious the method as described above in full context of Claim 1 of the instant application. Therefore, Claim 1 is deemed to contain allowable subject matter pending resolution of the above-stated 112(b) rejection.
Regarding Claims 2-16 and 18-20, due to their dependence upon an already allowable claim (i.e., Claim 1), they are further deemed allowable subject matter, pending resolution of the above-stated 112(b) rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
(a) Olson, et al. (US 20180366406 A1); discloses an analogous microfabrication method using acid instead of UV radiation; however, Olson did not further disclose that said acid was comprised from a selective attachment agent that adhered to the features of the existing pattern. Olson further did not disclose the repeating of this process in order to form a functional stack of memory devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Noah C. Robertson whose telephone number is (571) 317-0595. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30 AM - 6:30 PM (Eastern Time Zone).
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, William B Partridge, can be reached at (571) 270-1402. 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.
/Noah C. Robertson/Examiner, Art Unit 2812
/William B Partridge/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights