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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 2 in Figure 1A; 104 in Figure 1B. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
PNG
media_image1.png
588
1116
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The drawings are objected to because of the following:
In Figure 4, step 408: Is this step (“Provide purge gas”) discussed at this step in the specification?
PNG
media_image2.png
483
767
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Page 10, paragraph 38, line 8: Change “16-23” to “16, 18, 20, 23”, and change “22-27” to “22, 24, 26, 27”.
Page 12, paragraph 43, line 4: Is reference number 110 the reaction space or the gas expansion area. See paragraph 44, line 5.
Page 14, paragraph 47, line 1 of the page: Change 44 to 43.
Page 14, paragraph 47, line 2 of the page: Change 39 to 38, and delete “, and 53”. These aren’t shown in Figure 1C.
Page 14, paragraph 47, line 3 of the page: Change 44 to 43.
Page 15, paragraph 52, last line of the page: Should “reaction space” be “gas expansion area” or “reaction space/gas expansion area”?.
Page 29, paragraph 111, line 4: Change 174 to 175—see page 30, paragraph 112, line 1—if a second transition metal layer precursor (paragraph 111, lines 3-4) is what applicants intended.
Page 30, paragraph 116, line 7: Change 175 to 174. Compare with line 5.
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 6, 9-11, 14, 19, and 20 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.
Regarding claim 6, which depends from claim 5, which depends from claim 4, which depends from claim 3, which depends from claim 1: Claim 6 states that:
the one or more transition metal layer precursors are selected from a group comprising: bis(tert-butylimino) bis(tert-butoxy) Mo, bis(tert-butylimido)bis(dimethylamido) Mo, bis(tert-butylimido)bis(dimethylamido) Mo, molybdenum hexacarbonyl, molybdenum pentachloride, Mo(NtBu)2(StBu)2, Mo(NMe2)4, Mo(NEt2)4, MO2(NMe2)6, Mo(tBuN)2(NMe2)2, Mo(tBuN)2(NEt2)2, Mo(NEtMe)4, Mo(NtBu)2(StBu)2, Mo(NtBu)2(iPr2AMD)2Mo(thd)3, MoO2(acac), MoO2(thd)2, MoO2(iPr2AMD)2, bis(tert-butylimido)-bis-(dimethylamido)tungsten, bis(tertbutylimido)-bis(tert-butylamido)tungsten, or a combination thereof.
(emphasis added).
This language appears to be directed to a Markush group. A Markush group requires the use of “the group consisting of” instead of “a group comprising”, and the defined set of elements including “and” at the end instead of “or”. See MPEP § 2117 (Markush Claims). Because the proper language is not used in claim 6, claim 6 is rejected as indefinite.
Regarding claim 9, which depends from claim 8, which depends from claim 7, which depends from claim 2, which depends from claim 1: Claim 7 defines a first oxide layer, a first metal oxide, a second oxide layer, and a second metal oxide. Claim 9 then states that the first metal oxide is deposited directly on the surface of the substrate to form a first metal oxide layer, and the second metal oxide is deposited directly on a top surface of the first metal oxide layer to form a second metal oxide layer. A question arises as to the relationship between the first oxide layer of claim 7 and the newly defined first metal oxide layer of claim 9, as well as the relationship between the second oxide layer of claim 7 and the newly defined second metal oxide layer of claim 9. The first metal oxide layer appears to be the first oxide layer of claim 7 and the second metal oxide layer appears to be the second oxide layer of claim 7. Because the language is unclear, claim 9 is rejected as indefinite. Claims 10 and 11 are rejected for depending from rejected base claim 9.
Regarding claim 14, which depends from claim 13, which depends from claim 12, which depends from claim 1: Claim 14 requires H2 and N2 be combined in a predetermined ratio. However, the language is unclear as to how to determine the predetermined ratio. Because the language is unclear, claim 14 is rejected as indefinite.
Regarding claim 19, which depends from claim 2, which depends from claim 1: Claim 19, lines 3-4, require “the depositing the transition metal layer over the substrate surface….” However, this language is not in claims 1, 2, or 19. Because antecedent basis is missing for this phrase, claim 19 is rejected as indefinite.
Regarding claim 20, which depends from claim 2, which depends from claim 1: Claim 20, lines 3-4, require “the depositing the transition metal layer over the substrate surface….” However, this language is not in claims 1, 2, or 20. Because antecedent basis is missing for this phrase, claim 20 is rejected as indefinite.
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.
(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.
Claims 1, 2, 7, 8, 12-16, and 18-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yoon, U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2019/0057860, Figures 4-6.
PNG
media_image3.png
443
577
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
435
681
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1: Yoon Figures 4-6 disclose a semiconductor processing method comprising: a. supporting a substrate (210) comprising one or more oxide layers (220, 224) disposed on the substrate (210/108) on a substrate support (106) in a first reaction chamber (102); b. contacting a top surface of the one or more oxide layers (220, 224) of the substrate (210) with an excited species (plasma: nitrogen, argon, argon/hydrogen, among other possible species); c. supporting the substrate (210/108) in a second reaction chamber (102); and d. depositing a transition metal layer (228) over the top surface subsequent to contacting the top surface with the excited species. Yoon specification ¶¶ 58-59; 47-57 (details regarding reaction chamber); 60 (one or more reaction chambers may be used).
Regarding claim 2, which depends from claim 1: Yoon discloses depositing the one or more oxide layers (220, 224) on a surface of the substrate (210). Id. ¶¶ 58, 59.
Regarding claim 7, which depends from claim 2: Yoon discloses the depositing the one or more oxide layers (220, 224) on the surface of the substrate (210) comprises: a. contacting the substrate (210) with a first precursor to deposit a first oxide layer comprising a first metal oxide; and b. contacting the substrate (210) with a second precursor to deposit a second oxide layer comprising a second metal oxide. Id. ¶¶ 58, 59, 39-41 (describing different ALD cycles which include HfO2 and a dopant species, the dopant species changing with each ALD cycle).
Regarding claim 8, which depends from claim 7: Yoon discloses the first metal oxide is different from the second metal oxide. Id.
Regarding claim 12, which depends from claim 1: Yoon discloses the excited species is generated in a remote plasma unit (RPU). See id. ¶¶ 47, 51.
Regarding claim 13, which depends from claim 12: Yoon discloses the excited species are radicals of argon (Ar), hydrogen (H2), or nitrogen (N2), or a combination thereof. Id. ¶ 52.
Regarding claim 14, which depends from claim 13: Yoon discloses H2 and N2 are combined in a predetermined ratio. See id.
Regarding claim 15, which depends from claim 13: Yoon discloses the excited species is H2. Id.
Regarding claim 16, which depends from claim 13: Yoon discloses contacting the top surface of the one or more oxide layers (220, 224) of the substrate (210/108) further comprises heating the substrate support (106) to adjust a temperature of the substrate (210/208). Id. ¶¶ 50, 53.
Regarding claim 18, which depends from claim 2: Yoon discloses the depositing the one or more oxide layers (220, 224) on the substrate (210) and the contacting the top surface of the one or more oxide layers (220, 224) of the substrate (210) with the excited species are performed in a same reaction chamber (102). Id. ¶¶ 58-60.
Regarding claim 19, which depends from claim 2: Yoon discloses the depositing the one or more oxide layers (220, 224) on the substrate (210), the contacting the top surface of the one or more oxide layers (220, 224) of the substrate (210) with the excited species and the depositing the transition metal layer (228) over the substrate surface are performed in a same reaction chamber (102). Id.
Regarding claim 20, which depends from claim 2: Yoon discloses the depositing the one or more oxide layers (220, 224) on the substrate (210), the contacting the top surface of the one or more oxide layers (220, 224) of the substrate (210) with the excited species and the depositing the transition metal layer (228) over the substrate surface are performed in two or more reaction chambers (102). Id.
Regarding claim 21, which depends from claim 1: Yoon discloses the first reaction chamber (102) and the second reaction chamber (102) are a same chamber. Id. ¶ 60.
Claims 1, 2, and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yoon Figures 1A and 2-4.
PNG
media_image5.png
427
832
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1: Yoon Figures 1A and 2-4 disclose a semiconductor processing method comprising: a. supporting a substrate (12) comprising one or more oxide layers (16) disposed on the substrate (12/108) on a substrate support (106) in a first reaction chamber (102); b. contacting a top surface of the one or more oxide layers (16) of the substrate (12) with an excited species (plasma: nitrogen, argon, argon/hydrogen, among other possible species); c. supporting the substrate (12/108) in a second reaction chamber (102); and d. depositing a transition metal layer (18) over the top surface subsequent to contacting the top surface with the excited species. Yoon specification ¶¶ 32-46; 47-57 (details regarding reaction chamber); 60 (one or more reaction chambers may be used).
Regarding claim 2, which depends from claim 1: Yoon discloses depositing the one or more oxide layers (16) on a surface of the substrate (12). Id. ¶¶ 38-43, 45, 46.
Regarding claim 7, which depends from claim 2: Yoon discloses the depositing the one or more oxide layers (16) on the surface of the substrate (12) comprises: a. contacting the substrate (12) with a first precursor to deposit a first oxide layer comprising a first metal oxide; and b. contacting the substrate (12) with a second precursor to deposit a second oxide layer comprising a second metal oxide. Id. ¶¶ 45, 46, 39-41 (describing different ALD cycles which include HfO2 and a dopant species, the dopant species changing with each ALD cycle).
Regarding claim 8, which depends from claim 7: Yoon discloses the first metal oxide is different from the second metal oxide. Id.
Regarding claim 9, which depends from claim 8: Yoon discloses the first metal oxide is deposited directly on the surface of the substrate (12) to form a first metal oxide layer and the second metal oxide is deposited directly on a top surface of the first metal oxide layer to form a second metal oxide layer, wherein the first metal oxide layer is thicker than the second metal oxide layer. See id. The number of cycles for the first metal oxide layer is chosen so that the first metal oxide layer is thicker than the second metal oxide layer.
Regarding claim 10, which depends from claim 9: Yoon discloses the first metal oxide layer is about 15 angstroms thick and the second metal oxide layer is about 10 angstroms thick. See id. The total thickness of the oxide layer is 5-12 nm, id. ¶ 39, which corresponds to 50-120 angstroms. The number of cycles included in the first metal oxide layer is chosen so that the first metal oxide layer is about 15 angstroms thick and the number of cycles included in the second metal oxide layer is chosen so that the second metal oxide layer is about 10 angstroms thick. The additional thickness of the oxide layer (that is, 50 angstrom – 25 angstroms = 25 angstroms, the lower limit; 120 angstroms – 25 angstroms – 95 angstroms, the upper limit) is separate from the first and second metal oxide layers.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon, and further in view of Cho, U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2023/0209804 and Kim, U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2015/0031195.
Regarding claim 3, which depends from claim 1: Yoon implies that the depositing the transition metal layer (228) comprises exposing the substrate (210) to one or more transition metal layer precursors because the transition metal layer is deposited in the same chamber as earlier layers, Yoon specification ¶¶ 58-60, but does not specifically state this. Yoon discloses that its transition metal layer (228) can be tungsten. Id. ¶ 58.
Cho, directed to similar subject matter, discloses a top electrode (150) on a hafnium oxide layer (124), the top electrode being tungsten or tungsten nitride. Cho specification ¶¶ 26, 39. One having ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date would be motivated to modify Yoon to replace the tungsten transition metal layer with tungsten nitride because the modification would have involved the substitution of an equivalent known for the same purpose.
Kim discloses that tungsten nitride can be deposited by exposing a substrate to a transition metal precursor. See Kim specification ¶¶ 49, 50. One having ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date would be motivated to modify Yoon and Cho to use the Kim precursor because the Kim precursor can be used in an ADL process to form tungsten nitride. Id. ¶ 50.
Regarding claim 4, which depends from claim 3: The combination discloses the transition metal layer is a transition metal nitride. Cho specification ¶ 26.
Regarding claim 5, which depends from claim 4: The combination discloses the transition metal nitride is molybdenum nitride (MoN) or tungsten nitride (WN). Id. (WN).
Regarding claim 6, which depends from claim 5: The combination discloses the one or more transition metal layer precursors are selected from a group comprising: bis(tert-butylimino) bis(tert-butoxy) Mo, bis(tert-butylimido)bis(dimethylamido) Mo, bis(tert-butylimido)bis(dimethylamido) Mo, molybdenum hexacarbonyl, molybdenum pentachloride, Mo(NtBu)2(StBu)2, Mo(NMe2)4, Mo(NEt2)4, MO2(NMe2)6, Mo(tBuN)2(NMe2)2, Mo(tBuN)2(NEt2)2, Mo(NEtMe)4, Mo(NtBu)2(StBu)2, Mo(NtBu)2(iPr2AMD)2Mo(thd)3, MoO2(acac), MoO2(thd)2, MoO2(iPr2AMD)2, bis(tert-butylimido)-bis-(dimethylamido)tungsten, bis(tertbutylimido)-bis(tert-butylamido)tungsten, or a combination thereof. Kim specification ¶ 50 (bis(tert-butylimido)-bis-(dimethylamido)tungsten).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon, and further in view of Cho.
Regarding claim 17, which depends from claim 16: Yoon is silent as to the temperature at which the process is carried out.
Cho, directed to ALD deposition, discloses a range of suitable deposition temperature as 200-400 °C, Cho specification ¶ 109, in which the claimed temperature of “about 360°C” falls. One having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Yoon to use the Cho temperature range, and furthermore, one having ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date would be motivated to optimize the combination to find a suitable temperature because Cho directs one having ordinary skill in the art that the range of 200-400°C is suitable.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With regard to claim 11: The claim has been found allowable because the prior art of record does not disclose “the second metal oxide layer comprises lanthanum oxide (La2O3) or aluminum oxide (Al2O3), or a combination thereof”, in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTORIA KATHLEEN HALL whose telephone number is (571)270-7567. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8 a.m.-5 p.m.
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, Fernando Toledo can be reached at 571-272-1867. 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.
/Victoria K. Hall/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights