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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-9, 11-20 are pending in this application. Amended claims 1, 7, 18 and canceled claim 10 are noted.
The amendment dated 01/22/2026 has been entered and carefully considered. The examiner appreciates the amendments to the claims. In view of arguments and said amendment, the 112 rejection and a portion of the art rejection have been withdrawn.
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.
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 1-9, 11-12, 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oka et al. (2010/0255218) in view of Agnew et al. (WO 2021/087132 A1).
Oka teaches a method of depositing silicon oxide film by plasma enhanced atomic layer deposition (title) by introducing a silicon containing precursor and an oxygen supplying reactant in a PEALD reactor to deposit a silicon oxide layer on a substrate which has a resist pattern or etched lines (abstract). Specifically, an SiO2 film 44 is formed on top of a substrate 41 having a pattering layer 42 and line or etched line 43 (0069 and Figure 4B). It is specifically noted that the seam in Figure 4a is eliminated by the deposition of the SiO2 film in Figure 4b. However, the reference fails to teach semiconductor processing.
Agnew teaches a method of depositing an oxide material into a high aspect ratio feature (abstract) for seamless gapfill (title). The oxide material is silicon oxide and can be deposited by ALD for semiconductor device fabrication (0002) with an expressed purpose of reducing seams (0004). It would have been obvious to utilize a semiconductor device in Oka with the expectation of success because Agnew teaches of gapfilling silicon oxide in a semiconductor device.
With respect to the newly added limitation (previous claim 10), Oka teaches repeating the cycle multiple times (0018).
Regarding claim 2, Oka teaches plasma enhanced atomic layer deposition (title).
Regarding claim 3, Oka teaches silicon oxide (title).
Regarding claim 4, Agnew teaches an aspect ratio of 5:1 (0005).
Regarding claim 5, Oka teaches O2 (0025).
Regarding claims 6-7, Agnew teaches H2 (0006).
Regarding claim 8, the applicant requires effluents. It is noted that Oka teaches plasma and oxygen (0018) and thus would inherently produce effluents.
Regarding claim 9, Agnew teaches of forming water (0006).
In independent claim 11, the applicant requires effluents and reduction of seam. It is noted that Oka teaches plasma and oxygen (0018) and thus would inherently produce effluents. Furthermore, Agnew teaches of reducing seams (0004).
Regarding claim 12, Oka teaches silicon oxide (title).
Regarding claim 15, Agnew teaches H2 (0006).
Regarding claim 16, Oka teaches repeating (0018).
Regarding claim 17, Agnew teaches of reducing seams (0004).
In independent claim 18, the applicant requires a temperature of greater than 400oC. Agnew teaches a temperature of greater than 400oC (0006).
With respect to the newly added limitation of less than 10 Torr, Oka teaches a pressure between 100 to 1000 Pa (0048), which meets the claimed pressure.
Regarding claim 19 Agnew teaches water (0005).
Regarding claim 20, Agnew teaches a time between 30 and 180 minutes (0044).
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oka et al. (2010/0255218) in view of Agnew et al. (WO 2021/087132 A1) and further in view of Kang et al. (2014/0106574). The combination of Oka/Agnew fails to teach the claimed plasma.
Kang teaches a method of gapfilling an aspect ratio feature (title) using PEALD (abstract) to fill a gap with silicon oxide (0119). A microwave plasma is used (0031). It would have been obvious to utilize a microwave plasma in the combination with the expectation of success because Kang teaches of using a microwave plasma in a PEALD process.
Regarding claim 14, Kang teaches crosslink (0044).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant first argues that the prior art references fail to teach repeating the silicon-containing ALD process (p7).
The examiner disagrees. It is noted that Oka teaches a method of depositing silicon oxide film by plasma enhanced atomic layer deposition (title) by introducing a silicon containing precursor and an oxygen supplying reactant in a PEALD reactor to deposit a silicon oxide layer on a substrate which has a resist pattern or etched lines (abstract) and repeating the cycle multiple times (0018).
Applicant next argues that the references fail to teach effluents (p.7).
The examiner agrees in part. While the references are silent on effluents, Oka teaches a plasma and oxygen (0018) and this would inherently produce effluents. Assuming arguendo that the applicant’s assertion is correct, how can one use a plasma and oxygen and NOT produce effluents. To that end, how does the applicant produce effluents and the prior art doesn’t?
Applicant next argues that the references fail to teach the newly added pressure (p.8).
The examiner disagrees. Oka teaches a pressure between 100 to 1000 Pa (0048), which meets the claimed pressure.
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are not deemed persuasive.
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 BRET CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1417. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-8:30 MT.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at (571) 272-5166. 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.
/BRET P CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718 02/18/2026