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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II in the reply filed on 05/18/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-8 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group/invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 05/18/2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 are 16 are objected to because of the following informalities: the word wafter should be corrected to the word wafer. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 9 and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1/a2) as being anticipated by United States Patent Application No. 2005/0112879 to Fujimoto et al.
In regards to Claim 9, Fujimoto teaches an etching apparatus Fig. 1, comprising: a chamber 10; a wafer holder 16 to hold a wafer in the chamber,
wherein the wafer comprises a low-k dielectric material layer 64,
a dielectric hard mask layer over the dielectric material layer 66,
a first etchant gas inlet (line for 40) mounted to the chamber to introduce therein a first etchant gas [0036]; which is CHF3
and a second etchant gas inlet (line for 42) mounted to the chamber to introduce therein a second etchant gas [0042], which is C4F8
Fujimoto does not expressly teach a tungsten-based metal hard mask layer over the dielectric hard mask layer or that the first etchant gas is configured to etch the tungsten-based metal hard mask layer and that the second etchant gas is configured to etch the dielectric hard mask layer.
However, it has been held that expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim. Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969). Inclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. In re Young, 75 F.2d 966, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963)). In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235; In re Rishoi, 94 USPQ 71; In re Young, 25 USPQ 69; In re Dulberg, 129 USPQ 348; and Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647. Thus the type of substrate is not considered a positive limitation and the apparatus of Fujimoto would be capable of processing a substrate with a tungsten-based metal hard mask layer over the dielectric hard mask layer, based on user selection of the type of substrate, there being no structural limitations in the claims to prevent this otherwise.
Furthermore, it is noted that Fujimoto expressly teaches that the first etchant gas is CHF3 and the second etchant gas is C4F8, gases supported in the instant application as the gases that etch the layers of the claimed substrate, such that they are already gases that are already capable of etching the tungsten based metal hard mask layer and the dielectric hard mask layer as claimed. Because the apparatus has the same gas supplies, the teachings of Fujimoto expressly fulfill the claimed limitations as it would be capable of etching the claimed substrate.
In regards to Claim 11, Fujimoto does not expressly teach the tungsten-based metal hard mask layer comprises tungsten nitride.
However, it has been held that expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim. Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969). Inclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. In re Young, 75 F.2d 966, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963)). In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235; In re Rishoi, 94 USPQ 71; In re Young, 25 USPQ 69; In re Dulberg, 129 USPQ 348; and Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647. Thus the type of substrate is not considered a positive limitation and the apparatus of Fujimoto would be capable of processing a substrate with a tungsten nitride, based on user selection of the type of substrate, there being no structural limitations in the claims to prevent this otherwise.
In regards to Claim 12, Fujimoto teaches the first etchant gas is a fluorine-based etchant gas selected from a group consisting of CHF3.
In regards to Claim 13, Fujimoto teaches the second etchant gas is a carbon based etchant gas selected from a group consisting of C4F8.
In regards to Claim 14, Fujimoto teaches a purge gas inlet 46 mounted to the chamber to introduce therein a purge gas to purge the chamber [0040].
In regards to Claim 15, Fujimoto teaches a vacuum exhaust outlet 10bmounted to the chamber and connected to a vacuum pump [0040].
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Patent Application No. 2005/0112879 to Fujimoto et al in view of United States Patent Application No. 2016/0268143 to Chen et al.
The Examiner notes claims 9 and 11-15 are rejected again under Fujimoto in view of Chen for the purposes of compact prosecution, to illustrate that the substrate type and its processing is known in the prior art. It does not negate the functional limitation claim interpretation in the 102 rejection.
In regards to Claim 9, Fujimoto teaches an etching apparatus Fig. 1, comprising: a chamber 10; a wafer holder 16 to hold a wafer in the chamber,
wherein the wafer comprises a low-k dielectric material layer 64,
a dielectric hard mask layer over the dielectric material layer 66,
a first etchant gas inlet (line for 40) mounted to the chamber to introduce therein a first etchant gas [0036]; which is CHF3
and a second etchant gas inlet (line for 42) mounted to the chamber to introduce therein a second etchant gas [0042], which is C4F8
Fujimoto does not expressly teach a tungsten-based metal hard mask layer over the dielectric hard mask layer or that the first etchant gas is configured to etch the tungsten-based metal hard mask layer and that the second etchant gas is configured to etch the dielectric hard mask layer.
Chen teaches an etching method where the substrate 100/102 Fig. 1A with a low-k dielectric material layer 106 made of BCB or PTFE [0019], a dielectric hard mask layer over the dielectric material layer (silicon oxide, silicon nitride, silicon oxynitride, 112 [0022]) and a tungsten based hard mask layer 116 made of WN [0023] over the dielectric hard mask layer, the layers being etched (see Fig. 1A-1K) with a fluorine gas wherein the first plasma can be SF6, CHF3, NF3 [0036] and the second second plasma process can have a fluorine containing gas [0058], [0011-0076].
It has been held that an express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). See MPEP 2144.06 II. Thus, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified the substrate processed by the apparatus of Fujimoto with the substrate of Chen, as an art analogous substrate. Furthermore, as the application of the etching gases of Fujimoto to the substrate of Chen would result in the claimed invention, as Chen teaches a fluorine gas etches the layers and Fujimoto expressly teaches the specific gas supported by the instant application to edge the specific layers, the resulting apparatus fulfills the limitations of the claim.
In regards to Claim 10, Fujimoto does not expressly teach a third etchant gas inlet mounted to the chamber to introduce therein a third etchant gas configured to etch the low-k dielectric material layer.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to duplicate a gas source/inlet, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). MPEP 2144.04 VI-B. Thus, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to have duplicated the second gas source/inlet, which would implicitly form a gas that is capable of etching the low-k dielectric layer, as supported in the instant application’s [0038]. The resulting apparatus fulfills the limitations of the claim.
In regards to Claim 11, Fujimoto in view of Chen teaches the tungsten-based metal hard mask layer comprises tungsten nitride, as per the rejection of Claim 9 above.
In regards to Claim 12, Fujimoto teaches the first etchant gas is a fluorine-based etchant gas selected from a group consisting of CHF3.
In regards to Claim 13, Fujimoto teaches the second etchant gas is a carbon based etchant gas selected from a group consisting of C4F8.
In regards to Claim 14, Fujimoto teaches a purge gas inlet 46 mounted to the chamber to introduce therein a purge gas to purge the chamber [0040].
In regards to Claim 15, Fujimoto teaches a vacuum exhaust outlet 10bmounted to the chamber and connected to a vacuum pump [0040].
In regards to Claim 16, Fujimoto teaches an etching system (the apparatus of Fig. 1 in combination with the substrate W, the substrate being a positive limitation in a system) comprising: an etching apparatus Fig. 1 comprising: a chamber 10; a wafer holder 16, 20 to hold a wafer W in the chamber,
wherein the wafer comprises a low-k dielectric material layer 64,
a dielectric hard mask layer over the dielectric material layer 66,
a first etchant gas inlet (line from 40) mounted to the chamber to introduce therein a first etchant gas [0036]; which is CHF3
and a second etchant gas inlet (line from 42) mounted to the chamber to introduce therein a second etchant gas [0042], which is C4F8
a first etchant gas supply 40 connected to the first etchant gas inlet;
and a second etchant gas supply 42 connected to the second etchant gas inlet.
Fujimoto does not expressly teach a tungsten-based metal hard mask layer over the dielectric hard mask layer or that the first etchant gas is configured to etch the tungsten-based metal hard mask layer and that the second etchant gas is configured to etch the dielectric hard mask layer.
Chen teaches an etching method where the substrate 100/102 Fig. 1A with a low-k dielectric material layer 106 made of BCB or PTFE [0019], a dielectric hard mask layer over the dielectric material layer (silicon oxide, silicon nitride, silicon oxynitride, 112 [0022]) and a tungsten based hard mask layer 116 made of WN [0023] over the dielectric hard mask layer, the layers being etched (see Fig. 1A-1K) with a fluorine gas wherein the first plasma can be SF6, CHF3, NF3 [0036] and the second second plasma process can have a fluorine containing gas [0058], [0011-0076].
It has been held that an express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). See MPEP 2144.06 II. Thus, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified the substrate processed by the apparatus of Fujimoto with the substrate of Chen, as an art analogous substrate. Furthermore, as the application of the etching gases of Fujimoto to the substrate of Chen would result in the claimed invention, as Chen teaches a fluorine gas etches the layers and Fujimoto expressly teaches the specific gas supported by the instant application to edge the specific layers, the resulting apparatus fulfills the limitations of the claim.
In regards to Claim 17, Fujimoto the first etchant gas inlet comprises a first valve 40a to control the first etchant gas introduced into the chamber, and wherein the second gas inlet comprises a second valve 42a to control the second etchant gas introduced into the chamber.
In regards to Claim 18, Fujimoto in view of Chen teaches the tungsten-based metal hard mask layer comprises tungsten nitride, as per the rejection of Claim 16 above.
In regards to Claim 19, Fujimoto teaches the first etchant gas is a fluorine-based etchant gas selected from a group consisting of CHF3.
In regards to Claim 20, Fujimoto teaches the second etchant gas is a carbon based etchant gas selected from a group consisting of C4F8.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. United States Patent Application No. 2022/0375760 which teaches an atomic layer etching.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIFFANY Z NUCKOLS whose telephone number is (571)270-7377. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM-7PM.
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, PARVIZ HASSANZADEH can be reached at (571)272-1435. 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.
/TIFFANY Z NUCKOLS/Examiner, Art Unit 1716
/Jeffrie R Lund/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights