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 .
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 01/14/26 is acknowledged. Claims 11-20 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, and Group III, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/14/26.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6, 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Joseph Abel et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2020/0013616, here after Abel).
Claim 1 is rejected. Abel teaches a method of forming an oxide film on a substrate [0013], the method comprising:
performing a plurality of oxide film deposition cycles, at least one oxide film
deposition cycle of the plurality of oxide film deposition cycles comprising
exposing the substrate to an oxide-film precursor to adsorb the oxide-film
precursor to the substrate,
exposing the substrate to an oxygen-containing gas,
reacting the oxide-film precursor and the oxygen-containing gas, and
exposing the substrate to a carbon-containing inhibitor [0015-0016, 0076, fig. 4, 0055].
Claim 2 is rejected. Abel teaches the method comprises an atomic layer deposition process [0055].
Claim 3 is rejected as Abel teaches a subsequent oxide film deposition cycle
of the plurality of oxide film deposition cycles that is performed after the at least one oxide film deposition cycle omits exposing the substrate to the carbon-containing inhibitor [fig. 4].
Claim 6 is rejected as Abel teaches the substrate comprises a stack of
alternating layers of a first material and a second material, wherein a gap is formed in the stack of alternating layers of materials, and wherein the oxide film is deposited in the gap [fig. 2a, 2b, 0045].
Claim 8 is rejected as Abel teaches the gap comprises a reentrant
structure [0024].
Claim 9 is rejected as Abel teaches the carbon-containing inhibitor
comprises alkyl amine [0046].
Claim 10 is rejected as Abel teaches the oxide film comprises a silicon oxide
Film [0074].
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 4-5, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joseph Abel et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2020/0013616, here after Abel), further in view of Ian John Curtin et al (WO 2021/173886, here after Curtin).
Claim 4 is rejected. Abel teaches formation of the oxide with ALD which in fact comprising reacting the oxide-film precursor and the oxygen-containing gas, for formation of NAND devices [0074], but does not teach forming a plasma. Curtin teaches high aspect ratio gaps disposed in multi-layer stack comprising pairs of layers of alternating materials for making NAND device [0021], and depositing oxide in the gap with ALD or PEALD [0058, fig. 4]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of forming an oxide film on a substrate that Abel teaches, where the oxide in the gap forms by PEALD, because it is suitable method for depositing oxide in gap and form NAND device. Deposition by PEALD comprises forming a plasma comprising the oxygen-containing gas [0058].
Claim 5 is rejected as Able teaches comprising reacting plasma with carbon-containing inhibitor deposited in a prior oxide film deposition cycle of the plurality of oxide film deposition cycles [fig. 4].
Claim 7 is rejected. Abel teaches the limitation of claim 6 and teaches the gap comprises high aspect ratio [0084], for formation of NAND devices [0074], but does not teach aspect ratio within a range of 40:1 to 100:1. Curtin teaches high aspect ratio gaps disposed in multi-layer stack comprising pairs of layers of alternating materials for making NAND device[0021], and teaches the gap has high aspect ratio and about 50-100nm width, with a depth of about 4-8 microns[0035], which give aspect ratio of 80:1. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of forming an oxide film on a substrate that Abel teaches, where feature in substrate has aspect ratio of 80:1, because this high aspect ratio feature usable for making NAND devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TABASSOM TADAYYON ESLAMI whose telephone number is (571)270-1885. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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 5712725166. 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.
/TABASSOM TADAYYON ESLAMI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Prosecution Insights