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 .
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, 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Chung et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2006/0199372).
Regarding claim 1, Chung teaches a method of forming a structure, comprising:
forming an opening through a dielectric material layer that overlies a substrate [fig. 5a, 102 in layer 101];
forming a metallic adhesion layer comprising an alloy of copper and at least one transition metal that is not copper over a sidewall of the opening by depositing a stack of at least one copper layer and at least one transition metal layer [fig. 5d, copper seed layer 106, ruthenium layer 107, paragraphs[ 0055 and 0056];
inducing interdiffusion of atoms of copper and atoms of the at least one transition metal within the metallic adhesion layer by performing a thermal anneal process [paragraph [0062] teaches an anneal is performed after the formation of layer 107, the intention of the anneal to cause interdiffusion is not stated but would be a natural by-product of the layers being present together during an anneal process]; and
forming a copper fill material portion on an inner sidewall of the metallic adhesion layer [fig. 5e, 108].
Regarding claim 6, Chung discloses the method of claim 1, wherein:
The metallic adhesion layer is formed by depositing alternating layers of copper and at least one transition metal; and
Each layer of copper and each layer of the transition metal have a respective thickness in a range from 0.5nm to 5nm [paragraph [0055] teaches the copper layer has a thickness of 5nm, claim 3 teaches the transition metal layer is 0.5-5nm, the layers are formed one after another which would be alternating].
Regarding claim 7, Chung teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising forming a metallic nitride liner on the sidewall of the opening, wherein the metallic adhesion layer is formed on an inner sidewall of the metallic nitride liner [fig. 5a-5e, 105 is a metallic nitride [paragraph [0054], the adhesion layer 106 and 107 are formed on inner sidewalls of 105].
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.
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chung as applied to claims 1, 6 and 7 above, and further in view of Yang et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2011/0017499).
Regarding claim 9, Chung fails to teach the metallic adhesion layer is formed by a multi-metal deposition process in which copper atoms and atoms of the at least one transition metal are simultaneously deposited to form the alloy of copper and the at least one transition metal. However, Yang teaches an interconnect structure in which the seed layer is made of a multi-metal deposition process in which the adhesion layer is an alloy of copper and at least one transition metal [fig. 4, 32’, paragraphs [0034-0036]].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Yang into the method of Chung by forming the metallic adhesion layer by using a multi-metal deposition process to create an alloy of copper and the at least one transition metal. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Chung in the manner set forth above for at least the purpose of using a seed layer without increasing resistance of the final structure and no drawbacks to plating [Yang, paragraph [0005]].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-20 are allowed.
Claims 2-5 and 8 are 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:
Regarding claim 10, the prior art fails to disclose or suggest the method as claimed. Specifically, the prior art fails to teach forming a metallic adhesion layer comprising an alloy of copper and at least one transition metal that is not copper over a sidewall of the opening by depositing a stack of at least one copper layer and at least one transition metal layer and inducing interdiffusion of atoms of copper and atoms of the at least one transition metal within the metallic adhesion layer by performing a plasma anneal process.
Regarding claim 15, the prior art fails to disclose or suggest the method as claimed. Specifically, the prior art fails to teach forming a metallic adhesion layer by sequentially depositing a transition metal layer including at least one transition metal that is not copper and a copper layer consisting of essentially copper and inducing interdiffusion between the copper and the at least one transition metal by performing an anneal process, whereby the metallic adhesion layer comprises an alloy of copper and the at least one transition metal.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN M PARKER whose telephone number is (571)272-8794. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am - 3:30pm.
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, Zandra Smith can be reached at 571-272-2429. 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.
/JOHN M PARKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights