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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 7/1/26 has been entered.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6-11, 13-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Illiberi (US 2021/0301394).
Claims 1-3, 6-9, 13, 18:
Illiberi teaches a method for selective deposition on substrates having a silicon oxide surface (claimed “first surface”) and a metal surface (claimed “second surface”) [0033-0039] by silyating the silicon oxide surface with a silylation agent [0040]. The silylation agent is selected from chlorosilane, alkoxysilane, silyl halide, or nitrogen-bearing silane [0040].
Illiberi does not teach a silylation agent having an oxygen group and nitrogen/halogen group in a single embodiment. However, Illiberi does teach these functional groups separately used for the same purpose.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to practice the method of Illiberi using a silylation agent having both alkoxy groups and halogen/amine groups. Illiberi establishes that both of these groups are used in conjunction with a silicon-based inhibitor and combining them would have been expected to function in substantially the same manner.
Claims 4-5:
The surface to be passivated can be a metal oxide surface [0040] which are disclosed to include TaN [0037].
Claims 10-12, 14-16, 22-23:
A silylation agent having both alkoxy groups and halogen/amine groups means the number of alkoxy groups can be from 1-3 and the number of halogen/amine groups can be from 1-3. The amine group can be a tertiary amine [0041]. The R groups are C1-C4 [0041-0042].
Claim 17:
Temperature is 100-300°C [0044].
Claims 19, 21:
It is the case that silicon oxide (the target material) is deposited on the inhibited first surface [0192].
Claim 20:
A passivation blocking layer can also be added to the metal surface [0176]. Both are disclosed as being selective, so the order of deposition can be reversed and still achieve inhibition/passivation of both surfaces.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/1/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Illiberi [0042] explains that the silylating agents comprise R (alkyl groups) and A (any ligand which is reactive with the silicon oxide surface) as an explanation for the purpose of each of the functional groups. While this general formula specifies 3 R groups and 1 A group, we can see that multiple A groups are taught in [0040] the trichloro silylating agent (OD-TCS). Additionally, the possible A groups are specifically listed (chloro, alkoxy, amine, etc.) and are considered functional equivalents for the purpose of reacting with the silicon oxide surface. In sum, Illiberi renders obvious silylating agents having 1-3 A groups that are selected from the listed functional groups having reactivity with the silicon oxide surface.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 25-27 are allowed. Claim 24 is indicated as allowable subject matter, but objected to for depending from a rejected claim 1.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Illiberi is the closest prior art and does not teach the use of the claimed silicon inhibitor having the claimed composition without alkyl/phenyl groups bonded to the silicon atom.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX A ROLLAND whose telephone number is (571)270-5355. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6:30.
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 5712721234. 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.
/ALEX A ROLLAND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights