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 .
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-6, 9-10, & 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US PG Pub 2008/0099933; hereafter ‘933) in view of Driehuys et al. (US PG Pub 2002/0035836; hereafter ‘836).
Claim 1: ‘933 is directed towards a method of controlling a temperature of a first gas used for treating a wafer (see abstract & ¶ 4), comprising:
conducting the first gas at a first temperature to a gas injector coupled to a wafer treatment chamber containing the wafer (the first gas enters into the ampoule at a first temperature and is heated; abstract & ¶s 24-25);
conducting heat to a heating enclosure enclosing the gas injector to increase the temperature of the first gas in the gas injector from the first temperature to a second temperature (see ¶s 24-25); and
injecting, after increasing the temperature of the first gas to a second temperature, the first gas into the wafer treatment chamber from the gas injector, wherein the first gas is used for treatment of the wafer (¶s 24-25).
‘933 teaches that the heating can be performed by a resistive heater, a heater jacket, heating tape, and the like (¶s 24-25) and then further teaches that resistive heaters, heating tape, and heated circulated fluids are alternative heating means for other portions of the apparatus/process (¶ 30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use heated circulated fluids as the heating means for heating the first gas from the first temperature to a second temperature because it is an art recognized alternative heating means and would have predictably provided the same desired heating.
Though ‘933 does not explicitly disclose a heating device for heating the fluid given that the fluid is heated to maintain a desired temperature it is apparent that a heating device is present.
‘933 does not teach the same means for heating the first gas from a first temperature to a second temperature.
However, ‘836, which is directed towards heating and cooling of a gas (title) teaches using heated gas as the heated fluid in a heated jacket around a gas line (¶s 15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the teachings of ‘836 into the process of ‘933 and use a second gas as the fluid in the circulated fluid used for heating the first gas from the first temperature to a second temperature because heated gas is an art recognized fluid for use in heated fluid jackets when heating gas and would have predictably produced the desired results.
Claim 2: ‘933 further teaches establishing a plasma in the wafer treatment chamber from the first gas, wherein the plasma is used for the treatment of the wafer (¶ 27).
Claim 3: Conducing the first gas comprises:
conducting the first gas in a first gas tube to the gas injector, wherein:
the first gas is at a first pressure in the first gas tube (¶s 21-25);
the first gas is at a second pressure in the gas injector (¶s 21-25);
the first gas is in a gaseous state at the second pressure and the second temperature(¶s 21-25); and
the first gas is in a non-gaseous state at the first pressure and the first temperature(¶s 21-25).
Claim 4: The first gas comprises silicon tetrachloride (¶ 28) and ‘933 teaches heating the precursor to vaporize the precursor (¶s 6, 25, & 39).
However, the temperature the liquid is heated to is a result effective variable based on the desired state of the liquid (i.e. heat to boiling to vaporize and the Examiner notes that the boiling point of SiCl4 is 57.6ºC)
‘933 does not provide a specific temperature.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to heat the liquid SiCl4 precursor to a temperature sufficient to vaporize said liquid precursor because the temperature is a result effective variable based on the desired state of the precursor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to heat the liquid SiCl4 precursor to the boiling point of 57.6ºC because it would have predictably provided the desired vapor state of the liquid precursor.
Generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.05(II)(A).
Claim 5: ‘836 teaches that the heating gas can be dry air (¶ 75).
Though ‘836 does not explicitly term the “dry air” as “clean dry air” it is reasonable to presume that said air is “clean” in the sense that it does not cause any issues in the process.
Thus, it is reasonable to consider the “dry air” of the combination as reading on “clean dry air”.
Claim 6: ‘933 teaches controlling the pressure and temperature to obtain the desired state of the precursor (¶s 5-6, 33, 37, & 39) and modifying the temperature of the heating to change the temperature of the first gas based upon the pressure of the first gas ((¶s 5-6, 33, 37, & 39).
‘933 does not explicitly state that the pressure of the first gas is measured but does imply that the pressure is measured because it is necessary to know the pressure to determine the temperature at which a precursor will vaporize.
If however, it is not implicit that the pressure is measured it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to measure the pressure to determine an temperature for vaporization because temperature and pressure are directly proportional and using the optimal temperature will avoid degrading the precursor.
Claim 9: The first gas is isolated from the heated gas by the gas injector (the first gas is contained inside the ampoule/injector and the heater is on the outside of the ampoule; see Fig. 2, heater is outside the interior volume of the injector; ‘933).
Claim 10: The second temperature is sufficient to vaporize the precursor (¶s 5 & 24-25, ‘933).
The combination does not explicitly teach that the second temperature is greater than or equal to the boiling point of the first gas.
However, it is apparent that the second temperature is greater than or equal to the boiling point of the first gas because the precursor is injected in the vapor phase.
Additionally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.05(II)(A).
Claim 13: ‘933 provides a structure which comprises a first portion of a gas tube, a second portion of a gas tube wherein the first portion of the gas tube between the heating device and the second portion.
‘933 does not provide the relative size of the two portions of the gas tube.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to optimize the relative size of the two portions of the gas tube because changes in size and shape are prima facie obvious. See MPEP §2144.04(IV)(A)&(B).
Claim 14: ‘933 is directed towards a method of controlling a temperature of a first gas used for treating a wafer (see abstract & ¶ 4), comprising:
conducting the first gas at a first temperature to a gas injector coupled to a wafer treatment chamber containing the wafer (the first gas enters into the ampoule at a first temperature and is heated; abstract & ¶s 24-25);
conducting heat to a heating enclosure enclosing the gas injector to increase the temperature of the first gas in the gas injector from the first temperature to a second temperature (see ¶s 24-25); and
creating plasma using the first gas to treat the wafer (¶ 27).
‘933 teaches that the heating can be performed by a resistive heater, a heater jacket, heating tape, and the like (¶s 24-25) and then further teaches that resistive heaters, heating tape, and heated circulated fluids are alternative heating means for other portions of the apparatus/process (¶ 30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use heated circulated fluids as the heating means for heating the first gas from the first temperature to a second temperature because it is an art recognized alternative heating means and would have predictably provided the same desired heating.
Though ‘933 does not explicitly disclose a heating device for heating the fluid given that the fluid is heated to maintain a desired temperature it is apparent that a heating device is present.
‘933 does not teach the same means for heating the first gas from a first temperature to a second temperature.
However, ‘836, which is directed towards heating and cooling of a gas (title) teaches using heated gas as the heated fluid in a heated jacket around a gas line (¶s 15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the teachings of ‘836 into the process of ‘933 and use a second gas as the fluid in the circulated fluid used for heating the first gas from the first temperature to a second temperature because heated gas is an art recognized fluid for use in heated fluid jackets when heating gas and would have predictably produced the desired results.
‘933 teaches controlling the pressure and temperature to obtain the desired state of the precursor (¶s 5-6, 33, 37, & 39) and modifying the temperature of the heating to change the temperature of the first gas based upon the pressure of the first gas ((¶s 5-6, 33, 37, & 39).
‘933 does not explicitly state measuring a pressure of the first gas and modifying a temperature of the heated gas to change the temperature of the first gas based upon the pressure of the first gas but does imply that the pressure is measured and temperature is adjusted because it is necessary to know the pressure to determine the temperature at which a precursor will vaporize.
If however, it is not implicit that the pressure is measured it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to measure the pressure to determine an temperature for vaporization because temperature and pressure are directly proportional and using the optimal temperature will avoid degrading the precursor.
Claim 15: ‘933 discloses conducting the first gas comprises conducting the first gas through a first gas tube extending through a top surface of the heating enclosure and coupled to the gas injector (see Fig. 2, ‘933).
Claim 16: The combination teaches replacing the heating jacket of ‘933 with the heating means of ‘836 – i.e. the heating gas conduits are external of the ampoule of ‘933.
Thus it is apparent that the combination teaches conducting the heated gas comprises: conducting the heated gas through a second gas tube extending thourh a sidewall of the heating structure and applying the heated gas to a bend in the first gas tube disposed in a pathway between the second gas tube and the gas injector (see Fig. 2, ‘933 wherein the heating element 232 (¶ 30) is replaced by a gas tubes.
Claim 17: The first gas is isolated from the heated gas by the gas injector (Fig. 2).
Claim 18: ‘933 discloses a method of controlling a temperature of a first gas used for treating a wafer (title & abstract), comprising:
conducting the first gas at a first temperature through a first gas tube to a gas injector coupled to a wafer treatment chamber containing the wafer (the first gas enters into the ampoule at a first temperature and is heated; abstract & ¶s 24-25);
conducting heat to a heating enclosure enclosing the gas injector to increase the temperature of the first gas in the gas injector from the first temperature to a second temperature (see ¶s 24-25); and
injecting, after increasing the temperature of the first gas to a second temperature, the first gas into the wafer treatment chamber from the gas injector, wherein the first gas is used for treatment of the wafer (¶s 24-25).
‘933 teaches that the heating can be performed by a resistive heater, a heater jacket, heating tape, and the like (¶s 24-25) and then further teaches that resistive heaters, heating tape, and heated circulated fluids are alternative heating means for other portions of the apparatus/process (¶ 30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use heated circulated fluids as the heating means for heating the first gas from the first temperature to a second temperature because it is an art recognized alternative heating means and would have predictably provided the same desired heating.
Though ‘933 does not explicitly disclose a heating device for heating the fluid given that the fluid is heated to maintain a desired temperature it is apparent that a heating device is present.
‘933 does not teach the same means for heating the first gas from a first temperature to a second temperature.
However, ‘836, which is directed towards heating and cooling of a gas (title) teaches using heated gas as the heated fluid in a heated jacket around a gas line (¶s 15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the teachings of ‘836 into the process of ‘933 and use a second gas as the fluid in the circulated fluid used for heating the first gas from the first temperature to a second temperature because heated gas is an art recognized fluid for use in heated fluid jackets when heating gas and would have predictably produced the desired results.
I.e. the combination teaches heating a second gas using a heating device to produce a heated gas and conducting the heated gas through a second gas tube to a heating enclosure enclosing the gas injector to increase the temperature of the first gas from the first temperature to a second temperature,
‘933 discloses conducting the first gas comprises conducting the first gas through a first gas tube extending through a top surface of the heating enclosure and coupled to the gas injector (see Fig. 2, ‘933).
And the combination teaches replacing the heating jacket of ‘933 with the heating means of ‘836 – i.e. the heating gas conduits are external of the ampoule of ‘933.
Thus it is apparent that the combination teaches conducting the heated gas comprises: conducting the heated gas through a second gas tube extending thourh a sidewall of the heating structure and applying the heated gas to a bend in the first gas tube disposed in a pathway between the second gas tube and the gas injector (see Fig. 2, ‘933 wherein the heating element 232 (¶ 30) is replaced by a gas tubes.
Claim 19: ‘933 further teaches establishing a plasma in the wafer treatment chamber from the first gas, wherein the plasma is used for the treatment of the wafer (¶ 27).
Claim 20: The second temperature is sufficient to vaporize the precursor (¶s 5 & 24-25, ‘933).
The combination does not explicitly teach that the second temperature is greater than or equal to the boiling point of the first gas.
However, it is apparent that the second temperature is greater than or equal to the boiling point of the first gas because the precursor is injected in the vapor phase.
Additionally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.05(II)(A).
Claims 7-8 & 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘933 in view of ‘836 as applied above, and further in view of Brcka (US PG Pub 2006/0210713; hereafter ‘713.
Claim 7: As discussed above, the combination of ‘933 & ‘836 teaches performing a plasma enhanced CVD/ALD process with SiCl4.
The combination does not provide details of the plasma source.
However, ‘713, which is also directed towards PEALD (title) of SiCl4 (¶ 101) teaches that the plasma can be generated using a transformer coupled plasma coil (¶ 41).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the teachings of ‘713 and use a transformer coupled plasma coil as the source for the plasma in the process because a TCP coil is an art recognized means of generating a plasma in the process and would have predictably produced the plasma as desired.
Claim 8: ‘713 teaches that the TCP coil is disposed outside the wafer treatment chamber (see Fig. 1A, TCP coil (#50) is outside of chamber (#10); ¶ 41) and the location can be termed to be above because location is arbitrary until a frame of reference is recited.
Claim 11: As discussed above, the combination of ‘933 & ‘836 teaches performing a plasma enhanced CVD/ALD process with SiCl4.
The combination does not provide details of the plasma source.
However, ‘713, which is also directed towards PEALD (title) of SiCl4 (¶ 101) teaches that the plasma can be generated using a transformer coupled plasma coil (¶ 41) at a RF power of 0.1-100 MHz (¶ 43).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the teachings of ‘713 and use a transformer coupled plasma coil as the source for the plasma in the process because a TCP coil is an art recognized means of generating a plasma in the process and would have predictably produced the plasma as desired.
Although the taught range of 0.1-100 MHz is not explicitly the claimed range of 11-15 MHz, it does overlap the claimed range. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated a value within the claimed range since in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976).
Claim 12: As discussed above in regards to claim 11, the combination teaches generating a RF power between 0.1-100 MHz.
Although the taught range of 0.1-100 MHz is not explicitly the claimed range of 11-15 MHz, it does overlap the claimed range. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated a value within the claimed range since in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976).
‘713 further teaches that the plasma is created by applying the bias RF power to a wafer support configured to support the wafer (¶ 135).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES M MELLOTT whose telephone number is (571)270-3593. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30AM-4:30PM CST.
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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
/James M Mellott/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights