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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
With regards to claim 1 , the claim recites forming a dummy via in a trench of a stacking structure with a bottom anti-reflection coating material but subsequently defines the stacking structure as comprising a low k material layer and a cap layer. It is unclear whether the bottom anti-reflection coating (BARC) material is intended to be a part of the stacking structure or a filling material deposited in the trench or dummy via which makes the structure indefinite. The claim further recites performing a first etching process and a second etching process different from the first etching process, wherein
performing the first etching process etches a first portion of the dummy via with a
first depth, and performing the second etching process etches a second portion
of the dummy via with a second depth, and wherein the first depth is greater than
the second depth. The limitation is unclear because the reference points of the depths are undefined and because the second etch process is performed second to the first etch process, it is unclear how a prior etch process results in a greater depth than a second etch process depth rendering the final structure and processing steps unclear.
With regards to claim 12 , the claim recites forming a dummy via in a trench of a stacking structure with a bottom anti-reflection coating material but subsequently defines the stacking structure as comprising a low k material layer and a cap layer. It is unclear whether the bottom anti-reflection coating (BARC) material is intended to be a part of the stacking structure or a filling material deposited in the trench or dummy via which makes the structure indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 12,13,14,15,18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xiao (US Pub no. 2007/0224825 A1)
Regarding claim 12, Xiao et al discloses A method of manufacturing a semiconductor device, comprising: forming a dummy via (514, [0042], fig. 5b)in a trench (520, 0043, fig. 5c)of a stacking structure (512/513/514/510, [0039-0040]] fig. 5a)with a bottom anti-reflection coated material[0039], wherein the stacking structure comprises a low-k material layer(510, [0037], fig. 5a), and a cap layer, and the trench runs through the low-k material layer and the cap layer(530,[0039] fig. 5a); and removing a portion of the dummy via(514, 0047]) by performing a first etching process(step 406,[0047-0048]
and a second etching process (step-408,0050])different from the first etching process step 406,[0047-0048], wherein a first etch rate of the dummy via during the first etching process (step 406,[0047-0048] is greater than a second etch rate (step-408,0050])of the dummy via during the second etching process[0053] (examiner notes that the second etch is slower than the first etch because the protective polymer formed during the removal process slows removal).
Regarding claim 13, Xiao et al discloses wherein performing the first etching process(step 406,[0047-0048] etches a first portion of the dummy via(514) .
Regarding claim 14, Xiao et al discloses wherein performing the second etching
process (step-408,0050])etches a second portion of the dummy via[0050][0053].
Regarding claim 15, Xiao et al discloses wherein performing the first etching process(step 406,[0047-0048] uses a first etching gas(step 406,[0047-0048]
.
Regarding claim 18, Xiao et al discloses wherein performing the second etching
process (step-408,0050])uses a second etching gas(step-408,0050]).
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 8, & 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao (US Pub no. 2007/0224825 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Xiao et al discloses A method of manufacturing a semiconductor device,(fig. 5a-5d) comprising: forming a dummy via(514) in a trench(516) of a stacking structure with a bottom anti-reflection coated material[0038-0039], wherein the stacking structure comprises a low-k material layer (510)and a cap layer(512)[0038], and the trench(516) runs through the low-k material layer (510)and the cap layer(512)[0038]; and removing a portion of the dummy via (514)by performing a first etching process and a second etching process different from the first etching process(step 406-step 408)[0047][0051], wherein performing the first etching process etches a first portion of the dummy via (514)with a first depth[0049], and performing the second etching process etches a second portion of the dummy via (514)with a second depth[0050] but fails to teach wherein the first depth is greater than the second depth. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adjust the two step etching process such that wherein the first depth is greater than
the second depth through routine experimentation to optimize the etching profile. "[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)
Regarding claim 2, Xiao et al discloses wherein a height of the dummy via (514)after
performing the first etching process (step 406)and the second etching process(step 408) is equal to or less than 200 nm[0051].
Regarding claim 3, Xiao et al discloses wherein the first etching process(step 406) is performed before the second etching process(step 408)[0047][0051].
Regarding claim 4, Xiao et al discloses wherein the first etching process(step 406) is performed after the second etching process(step 408)[0047][0051].
Regarding claim 5, Xia et al discloses wherein performing the first etching process(step 406) uses a first etching gas[0047].
Regarding claim 8, Xiao et al discloses wherein performing the second etching process(step 408) uses a second etching gas[0051].
Regarding claim 11, Xiao et al discloses wherein removing the portion of the dummy via(514) is performed after forming the dummy via (514)in the trench(516) of the stacking structure(518)[0038-0039].
Claim(s) 6, 9 , 10, 16,17,19 & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao (US Pub no. 2007/0224825 A1) in view of Ali (US Pub no. 2004/0121581 A1)
Regarding claim 6, Xiao et al discloses all the claim limitations of claim 5 but fails to teach wherein the first etching gas comprises CHF₃ and O₂.
However, Ali et al discloses an etching process to remove BARC wherein the first etching gas comprises CHF₃ and O2[0010]. Since using CHF₃ and O2 gas is one of finite solutions to provide plasma etch to organic materials, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to try in Xiao et al because a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (U.S. 2007))
Regarding claim 9, Xiao et al discloses all the claim limitations of claim 8 but fails to teach wherein the second etching gas comprises H₂ and N₂.
Ali et al discloses wherein the second etching gas comprises H2 andN2(exposing the BARC to a plasma containing oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen, or similar gas species) [0010]. Since using N2 and H2 gas is one of finite solutions to provide plasma etch to organic materials, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to try in Xiao et al because a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (U.S. 2007))
Regarding claim 16, Xiao et al discloses all the claim limitations of claim 15 but fails to teach wherein the first etching gas comprises CHF₃ and O₂.
However, Ali et al discloses an etching process to remove BARC wherein the first etching gas comprises CHF₃ and O2[0010]. Since using CHF₃ and O2 gas is one of finite solutions to provide plasma etch to organic materials, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to try in Xiao et al because a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (U.S. 2007))
Regarding claim 19, Xiao et al discloses all the claim limitations of claim 18 but fails to teach wherein the second etching gas comprises H₂ and N₂.
Ali et al discloses wherein the second etching gas comprises H2 andN2(exposing the BARC to a plasma containing oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen, or similar gas species) [0010]. Since using N2 and H2 gas is one of finite solutions to provide plasma etch to organic materials, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to try in Xiao et al because a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (U.S. 2007))
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LATANYA N CRAWFORD EASON whose telephone number is (571)270-3208. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 AM-4:30 PM.
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, Steven B Gauthier can be reached at (571)270-0373. 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.
/LATANYA N CRAWFORD EASON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2813
Prosecution Insights