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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/31/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4, 6-11, and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kashkoush (PG Pub U.S 2005/0016929) and further in view of Okamoto (PG Pub U.S 2003/0132193).
Regarding claim 1, Kashkoush teaches a method (abstract, fig 1), comprising: performing a cleaning process to a wafer using a chemical solution (para 0045-0046), wherein the cleaning process removes contaminants from a wafer (para 0031, 0052, and 0056), analyzing the chemical solution to determine a contaminant concentration in the chemical solution (0052-0054); comparing the contaminant concentration to a baseline value (para 0057-0058); and adjusting one or more parameters of the cleaning process based on the comparison of the contaminant concentration in the chemical solution and the baseline value (0064-0065 and fig 2).
Kashkoush fails to specifically teach collecting the chemical solution in a drain collector and analyzing the chemical solution collected in the drain collector. However, Okamoto teaches a substrate processing method wherein it is known to collect the chemical solution in a drain collector and analyzing the chemical solution collected in the drain collector (abstract, para 0038, 0041-0042) in order to determine reuse of the chemical solution while also preventing contamination from being accumulated (para 0012). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Kashkoush to include collecting the chemical solution in a drain collector and analyzing the chemical solution collected in the drain collector as taught by Okamoto in order to measure the concentration of contaminants from the chemical solution to determine the reuse of the chemical solution while also preventing contamination from being accumulated.
Regarding claim 2, the present combination of Kashkoush and Okamoto teaches wherein analyzing the chemical solution comprises determining a concentration of metal ions in the chemical solution (para 0034 and claim 14 of Kashkoush).
Regarding claim 4, the present combination of Kashkoush and Okamoto Fury teaches wherein determining the concentration of metal ions comprises determining an amount of copper (0029 and 0049 of Kashkoush).
Regarding claim 6, the present combination of Kashkoush and Okamoto teaches in response to the contaminant concentration being equal to or less than the baseline value, terminating the cleaning process (0063-0064 fig 2 box 260 of Kashkoush) and in response to the contaminant concentration being greater than the baseline value, adjusting the one or more parameters in the cleaning process (0064-0065 of Kashkoush; check and make adjustments to process variables and from fig 2 box 270-290 reads on adjusting parameters).
Regarding claim 7, the present combination of Kashkoush and Okamoto teaches wherein adjusting the parameters of the first chemical solution comprises changing (decreasing) a water content in the chemical solution to be dispensed onto the wafer (para 0026, 0064, and 0066 and fig 2 of Kashkoush, stopping flow of water, reads on increasing concentration of the chemical solution). It would be obvious to increase concentration of the chemical solution (changing a water content) in response to contaminant concentration being greater than the baseline value in order to improve the removal of the contaminants.
Regarding claim 8, Kashkoush teaches a method, comprising: dispensing, (para 0032 and claim 11; source of fluid implicitly reads on external tank) in a wafer cleaning station, a chemical solution onto a wafer on a (para 0045-0046 and 0052-0054); analyzing the flow of the chemical solution to determine a concentration of contaminants (0034 and claim 14) in the chemical solution (0052-0054); and adjusting parameters of the chemical solution based on a comparison of the concentration of contaminants to a baseline value (0064-0065 and fig 2).
Kashkoush fails to teach diverting a flow of the chemical solution removed from the wafer to a drain collector. However, Okamoto teaches a substrate processing method wherein it is known to divert a chemical solution after removing it from the wafer to a drain collector (abstract and para 0038) in order to analyze/determine concentration (abstract, and para 0041-0042) to enable reuse of the chemical solution while also preventing contamination from being accumulated (para 0012). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kashkoush to include diverting a flow of the chemical solution removed from the wafer to a drain collector as taught by Okamoto in order to analyze/determine concentration to enable reuse of the chemical solution while also preventing contamination from being accumulated.
The present combination of Kashkoush and Okamoto fails to specifically teach wherein the concentration of the contaminants in the chemical solution is unchanged from when the chemical solution is removed from the wafer. However, Kashkoush also teaches that the sensing/analyzing module (60) can be placed anywhere in the recirculation loop, such as right after the process chamber (para 0052) in order to determine the contaminant concentration of the first chemical solution immediately after it exits the cleaning station. Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the present combination of Kashkoush and Okamota such that the analyzing step is performed right after the first chemical solution exits the cleaning station in order to determine the contaminant concentration of the first chemical solution immediately after it exits the cleaning station. Therefore, since the analyzing module 60 can be placed right after the process chamber (para 0052), it is reasonably expected that the concentration of the contaminants in the analyzed chemical solution is unchanged due to close positioning of the module 60 to the reaction chamber.
Regarding claim 9, depending on the contaminant level detected on the substrate, it would be reasonably expected to transfer the wafer out of the wafer cleaning station in response to the concentration of the contaminants being equal to or less than the baseline value; and adjusting the parameters of the first chemical solution in response to the first concentration of the contaminants being greater than the baseline value; since a value below the threshold indicates cleanliness of the substrate processing while a value above would require adjustment of parameters to achieve desired cleanliness.
Regarding claim 10, the present combination of Kashkoush and Okamoto teaches wherein analyzing the flow of the chemical solution comprises determining a concentration of one or more metal ions (para 0034 and claim 14 of Kashkoush).
Regarding claim 11, the present combination of Kashkoush and Okamoto teaches wherein adjusting the parameters of the first chemical solution comprises decreasing a water content in the chemical solution to be dispensed onto the wafer (para 0026, 0064, and 0066 and fig 2 of Kashkoush, stopping flow of water, reads on increasing concentration of the chemical solution). It would be obvious to increase concentration of the chemical solution (decreasing a water content) in response to contaminant concentration being greater than the baseline value in order to improve the removal of the contaminants.
Regarding claim 13, the present combination of Kashkoush and Okamoto teaches wherein the parameters of the chemical solution comprise a dispense time of the chemical solution (para 0066-0068 and fig 2 of Kashkoush) and a water content of the chemical solution (para 0026, 0064, and 0066 and fig 2 of Kashkoush).
Regarding claim 14, depending on the contaminant level detected, it would be reasonably expected to repeat the cleaning method steps wherein; after adjusting the parameters of the chemical solution, collecting the dispensed first chemical solution; determining an other concentration of contaminants in the chemical solution; adjusting the parameters of the chemical solution in response to the other concentration of the contaminants being greater than the baseline value; and transferring the wafer out of the wafer cleaning station in response to the other concentration of the contaminants being equal to or less than the baseline value, since a value below the threshold indicates cleanliness of the substrate processing while a value above would require adjustment of parameters to achieve desired cleanliness.
Regarding claim 15, depending on the contaminant level detected previously, it would be reasonably expected to repeat the cleaning method steps wherein; before dispensing the chemical solution onto the wafer, dispensing an other chemical solution onto the wafer; determining a concentration of contaminants in the other chemical solution; and adjusting the parameters of the chemical solution in response to the concentration of contaminants of the other chemical solution being greater than the baseline value in order to analyze and make adjustments regarding the parameters and the cleaning solution in order to achieve a cleaner substrate.
Regarding claim 16, Kashkoush teaches a method, comprising: performing a cleaning process on a wafer by dispensing a chemical solution over the wafer (para 0032 and claim 11; source of fluid implicitly reads on external tank), removing the chemical solution from the wafer, wherein the chemical solution has a contaminants concentration immediately after it is removed from the wafer (para 0031, 0052, and 0056); analyzing a portion of the chemical solution with a contaminants concentration (0034 and claim 14); comparing the contaminant concentration to a baseline value (para 0057-0058); in response to the contaminant concentration being equal to or less than the baseline value, terminating the cleaning process (0063-0064 fig 2 box 260 of Kashkoush) and in response to the contaminant concentration being greater than the baseline value, adjusting the one or more parameters in the cleaning process (0064-0065 of Kashkoush; check and make adjustments to process variables and from fig 2 box 270-290 reads on adjusting parameters).
Kashkoush fails to teach diverting a portion of the chemical solution to a drain collector. However, Okamoto teaches a substrate processing method wherein it is known to divert a chemical solution after removing it from the wafer to a drain collector (abstract and para 0038) in order to analyze/determine concentration (abstract, and para 0041-0042) to enable reuse of the chemical solution while also preventing contamination from being accumulated (para 0012). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kashkoush to include diverting a portin of the chemical solution removed from the wafer to a drain collector as taught by Okamoto in order to analyze/determine concentration to enable reuse of the chemical solution while also preventing contamination from being accumulated.
Claims 3 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kashkoush (PG Pub U.S 2005/0016929), Okamoto (PG Pub U.S 2003/0132193) and further in view of Fury et al. (PG Pub U.S 2004/0255978).
Regarding claim 3, the present combination of Kashkoush and Okamoto fails to teach increasing a temperature of the chemical solution in response to the concentration of metal ions exceeding the baseline value. However, Fury teaches a substrate cleaning system wherein it is known to increase the temperature of the chemical based on the amount of contaminants to be removed (para 0047-0049) in order to effectively clean the substrate. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to in response to the contaminant concentration of metal ions exceeding the baseline value, send a command (second command) to the cleaning station to increase a temperature of the chemical solution as suggested by Fury in order to effectively clean the substrate.
Regarding claim 12, the present combination of Kashkoush and Okamoto fails to teach wherein adjusting the parameters of the chemical solution comprises increasing a temperature of the chemical solution to be dispensed onto the wafer. However, Fury teaches a substrate cleaning system wherein it is known to increase the temperature of the chemical based on the amount of contaminants to be removed (para 0047-0049) in order to effectively clean the substrate. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the present combination of Kashkoush and Okamoto such that adjusting the parameters of the chemical solution comprises increasing a temperature of the chemical solution to be dispensed onto the wafer as suggested by Fury in order to effectively clean the substrate.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kashkoush (PG Pub U.S 2005/0016929), Okamoto (PG Pub U.S 2003/0132193) and further in view of Mori et al. (EP 1084402B1).
Regarding claim 5, the present combination of Kashkoush and Okamoto teaches performing the cleaning process using deionized water (para 0045 of Kashkoush) but fails to teach using a mixture of hydrochloric acid, hydrogen peroxide, and deionized water. However, Mori further teaches that it is known to use a mixture of deionized water and hydrogen fluoride (hydrofluoric acid) (0027) in order to rinse the substrate and achieve the predictable result of removing metallic contaminants (0024). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the acid in the DI water chemical mixture of Kashkoush and Okamoto to be hydrofluoric acid as taught by Mori in order to achieve the predictable result of cleaning the substrate and removing metallic contaminants.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PRADHUMAN PARIHAR whose telephone number is (571)270-1633. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am-6pm EST.
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, Kaj Olsen can be reached on 571-272-1344. 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.
/P.P/Examiner, Art Unit 1714
/KAJ K OLSEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1714