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 .
The amendment filed on March 05, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-14 are pending in this application.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 4-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by De Silva et al. [US 20210149298 A1, hereafter De Silva].
As per Claim 1, De Silva teaches a structure (See fig. 6) comprising
a dose reducing layer (hardmask 150), the dose reducing layer comprising an
extreme ultraviolet (EUV) radiation-absorbing element (Para 54);
a resist (130), the resist being sensitive to EUV radiation (Para 59); and
an adhesion layer (metal brush layer 120), the adhesion layer being positioned between the dose reducing layer and the resist, the adhesion layer comprising amorphous carbon or an organic compound (See fig. 6, Para 54-59).
As per Claim 4, De Silva teaches the structure according to claim 1, wherein the
dose reducing layer 150 has a thickness of at most 7.0 nm (Para 56).
As per Claim 5, De Silva teaches a method of forming a structure (See fig. 6),
Comprising the following steps, in the given order:
providing a substrate to a reaction chamber (Para 54, wherein the CVD process chamber);
forming a dose reducing layer 150 on the substrate 110, the dose reducing layer
comprising an extreme ultraviolet (EUV) raciation-absorbing element (Para 55);
forming an adhesion layer 120 on the dose reducing layer, the adhesion layer
comprising amorphous carbon or an organic compound; and
forming a resist on the adhesion layer (See fig. 6, Para 54-59).
As per Claim 6, De Silva teaches the method according to claim 5, wherein the structure formed comprises; the dose reducing layer, the resist, and the adhesion layer; the resist is sensitive to EUV radiation; and the adhesion layer is positioned between the dose reducing layer and the resist, the adhesion layer comprising amorphous carbon or an organic compound (See fig. 6, Para 54).
As per Claim 7, De Silva teaches the method according to claim 5, wherein the
substrate comprises a hard mask on which the dose reducing layer is formed (See fig. 5).
As per Claims 8-10, De Silva teaches the method according to claim 5, wherein
the dose reducing layer is formed by plasma-enhanced atomic layer deposition (Para 54, wherein PVD).
As per Claim 11, De Silva teaches a method of transferring a pattern onto a
substrate (See fig. 7), the method comprising:
providing a substrate 110, the substrate comprising a structure (Para 36), the
structure comprising;
a dose reducing layer 150, comprising an extreme ultraviolet (EUV) radiation-absorbing element (Para 54);
a patterned resist, comprising a pattern (See fig. 7);
an adhesion layer 120, comprising amorphous carbon or an organic compound, and a hard mask, wherein the adhesion layer is positioned between the dose
reducing layer 150 and the patterned resist 130, and
wherein the dose reducing layer is positioned between the hard
mask and the adhesion layer (See fig. 6);
exposing the substrate to a first etch (See fig. 8), thereby transferring the pattern
from the patterned resist to the adhesion layer (Para 62);
exposing the substrate to a second etch (See fig. 9), thereby transferring the
pattern from the adhesion layer to the dose reducing layer (Para 64); and
exposing the substrate to a third etch (See fig. 10), thereby transferring the
pattern from the dose reducing layer to the hard mask (Para 66),
wherein the first etch, the second etch, and the third etch are different (See fig.
8-10, Para 62-66).
As per Claim 12, De Silva teaches the structure according to claim 1, wherein
the resist comprises a metalorganic resist (Para 27).
As per Claim 13, De Silva teaches the structure according to claim 1, wherein
the EUV radiation-absorbing element comprises tin (Para 30).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Silva as applied in claim 5 above, in view of Ma et al. [US 20250347996 A1, hereafter Ma].
As per Claim 14, De Silva teaches the method the system to carry out a method
according to claim 5.
De Silva does not explicitly disclose a system comprising a dose reducing layer reaction chamber being constructed and arranged for forming a dose reducing layer; a resist reaction chamber being constructed and arranged for forming a resist; an adhesion layer reaction chamber, being constructed and arranged for forming an adhesion layer;
a transfer module constructed and arranged for moving a substrate between the dose reducing layer reaction chamber, the resist reaction chamber, and the adhesion layer reaction chamber while keeping the substrate in a vacuum or inert gas environment, and
a controller;
wherein each of the dose reducing layer reaction chamber, the resist reaction chamber, and the adhesion layer reaction chamber are operationally coupled with one or more precursor sources, and wherein the controller is arranged for causing the system carry out a method according to claim 5.
Ma teaches a processing system 300, The processing system 300A generally
includes a front end staging area 302 where substrate cassettes 309 are supported and
substrates are loaded into and unloaded from a loadlock chamber 312, a transfer chamber 311 housing a substrate handler 313, a series of tandem process chambers 306, 316, and 326 mounted on the transfer chamber 311, and a back end 338 which houses the support utilities needed for operation of the processing system 300A, such as a gas panel 303, and a power distribution panel 305. A system controller 390 contains computer and other circuitry for automation of tasks (See fig. 3A, Para 27-28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the processing system as claimed in order to produce a desired higher efficiency in the lithographic process.
Claim(s) 1 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tan et al. [US 20220035247 A1, hereafter Tan].
As per Claim 1, Tan teaches a structure (See fig. 2C) comprising:
a dose reducing layer (hardmask 204), the dose reducing layer comprising an
extreme ultraviolet (EUV) radiation-absorbing element (Para 38);
a resist (imaging layer 208), the resist being sensitive to EUV (Para 84-85); and
an adhesion layer (an underlayer 206), the adhesion layer being positioned
between the dose reducing layer and the resist, the adhesion layer comprising
amorphous carbon or an organic compound (See fig. 2C, Para 6 and 85).
As per Claim 5, Tan teaches a method of forming a structure (See fig. 2C),
Comprising:
the following steps, in the given order: providing a substrate to a reaction
chamber (Para 216, wherein the CVD process chamber);
forming a dose reducing layer (hardmask 204) on the substrate 202, the dose
reducing layer comprising an EUV-absorbing element (Para 85);
forming an adhesion layer (an underlayer 206) on the dose reducing layer, the
adhesion layer comprising amorphous carbon or an organic compound; and, forming a
resist on the adhesion layer (See fig. 2C, Para 6 and 85).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 3 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on March 05, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the remark section, with respect to claims 1 and 5, Applicant argued that applied prior arts to De Silva and Tan do not disclosed the claimed limitation of “a dose reducing layer comprising an extreme ultraviolet (EUV) radiation-absorbing element” as recited by the claims.
The hardmask elements specified by De Silva and Tan, such as Silicon Oxide, does have measurable absorption and can be used in specific EUV applications.
Regarding claim 4, Applicant also argued that the prior art to De Silva does not disclose “the dose recucing layer has a thickness of at most 7.0 nm”.
The Examiner disagrees. De Silva [0057] disclosed the hardmask layer 150 can have a thickness in a range of about 2 nm to about 20 nm, wherein the thickness of 2 nm – 7 nm of this teaching addressed the claimed limitation. Therefore, Applicant’s argument on the above points is not persuasive.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MESFIN ASFAW whose telephone number is (571)270-5247. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 4 pm.
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, Toan Ton can be reached at 571-272-2303. 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.
/MESFIN T ASFAW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Prosecution Insights