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 § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al (US 2015/0140907).
Regarding claim 1, Watanabe et al disclose a manufacturing process of a semiconductor device, wherein a chemical mechanical polishing (or CMP). This chemical mechanical polishing (which will be hereinafter referred to as CMP) is performed with use of a polishing apparatus [0002]; As shown in FIG. 1, the polishing apparatus includes a polishing table 2 for supporting a polishing pad 1 thereon, a top ring 3 for pressing a substrate W, such as a wafer, against the polishing pad 1, and a polishing-liquid supply structure 4 for supplying a polishing liquid (or slurry) onto the polishing pad 1 [0039]; and rotating the polishing pad [0040].
Watanabe et al disclose that the flow rate of the polishing liquid is increased gradually from the initial value IF in a stepwise manner until the flow rate of the polishing liquid reaches the predetermined set value F. The controller 22 controls the regulator 16 such that the flow rate of the polishing liquid increases gradually in a stepwise manner [0054]; and aforesaid teaching obviously teach that the initial flow rate of the polishing liquid resemble as the claimed first time interval of the flow rate characterized by a first function and the increased flow rate of the liquid resemble as the claimed second time interval of the flow rate characterized by a second function, which is different than that of the first function as claimed.
Regarding claims 2-4, Watanabe et al also disclose that the supply of the polishing slurry is controlled by a controller 22 so as to start the intermittent supply of the polishing liquid. The on-off valve 20 performs its opening and closing operations predetermined number of times to intermittently pass the polishing liquid on the polishing pad [0056],[0060]; and such are repeated [0063].
Regarding claim 5, Watanabe et al may not explicitly disclose that the flow rate characterized by the second function decreases as the supplying the slurry at the flow rate characterized by the second function is repeated. However, Watanabe et al disclose above that the flow rate is controlled by intermittent supply of the polishing liquid by opening and closing the supply valve and therefore, during the second function, the flow rate is decreased.
Regarding claim 6, it is obviously understood from the teaching of Watanabe et al that the flow rate of the polishing liquid (slurry) is gradually increasing [0054]. So, they are spaced apart in time.
Regarding claims 7-8, Watanabe et al disclose that the flow rate of the polishing liquid (slurry) is gradually increasing [0054]; so, it would have been obvious that the first, second and third time intervals occurs during the gradual increasing of the polishing liquid and wherein the first, second and third functions are different form each other and they would be performed in order.
Regarding claim 9, the duration of the first time interval and the second time interval may vary with time as Watanabe et al disclose that the flow rate of the polishing liquid (slurry) is gradually increasing [0054]. One of ordinary skilled in the art would have been easily motivated to optimize such for desired polishing rate.
Regarding claim 10, Watanabe et al disclose that the polishing-liquid supply structure 4 includes a slurry supply nozzle 10 for supplying the polishing liquid onto the polishing pad 1 ([0043;Figure 2); and the supply of the polishing slurry is controlled by a controller 22 ([0060], Figure 2).
Claim(s) 11-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (US 2010/0187588) in view of Watanabe et al (US 2015/0140907).
Regarding claim 11, Kim et al disclose a manufacturing process of a memory device, including the step of forming patterns on a substrate, forming a layer covering the pattern (Figure 2B); an etch-back process or a chemical mechanical polish (CMP) process ([0046], Figure 2C).
Kim et al fail to disclose the specifics of supplying a slurry during the CMP process as recited in the claim 11.
However, Watanabe et al disclose a manufacturing process of a semiconductor device, wherein a chemical mechanical polishing (or CMP). This chemical mechanical polishing (which will be hereinafter referred to as CMP) is performed with use of a polishing apparatus [0002]; As shown in FIG. 1, the polishing apparatus includes a polishing table 2 for supporting a polishing pad 1 thereon, a top ring 3 for pressing a substrate W, such as a wafer, against the polishing pad 1, and a polishing-liquid supply structure 4 for supplying a polishing liquid (or slurry) onto the polishing pad 1 [0039]; and rotating the polishing pad [0040].
Watanabe et al disclose that the flow rate of the polishing liquid is increased gradually from the initial value IF in a stepwise manner until the flow rate of the polishing liquid reaches the predetermined set value F. The controller 22 controls the regulator 16 such that the flow rate of the polishing liquid increases gradually in a stepwise manner [0054]; and aforesaid teaching obviously teach that the initial flow rate of the polishing liquid resemble as the claimed first time interval of the flow rate characterized by a first function and the increased flow rate of the liquid resemble as the claimed second time interval of the flow rate characterized by a second function, which is different than that of the first function as claimed.
Watanabe et al also disclose that the opening and closing operations of the on-off valve 20 are performed the predetermined number of times. As the opening and closing operations of the on-off valve 20 are repeated, supply of the polishing liquid and stop of the supply are repeated. As a result, the polishing liquid is intermittently supplied on the polishing pad [0063]; and aforesaid teaching above, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been easily recognized that such repeated supplying of the polishing liquid on the polishing pad for a first and a second duration as the instant invention.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ Watanabe et al's teaching of supplying polishing liquid (slurry) into the teaching of Kim et al for efficient polishing the substrate by maintaining the physical quantity of the polishing liquid as suggested by Watanabe et al.
Regarding claim 12, Watanabe et al also disclose that the opening and closing operations of the on-off valve 20 are performed the predetermined number of times. As the opening and closing operations of the on-off valve 20 are repeated, supply of the polishing liquid and stop of the supply are repeated. As a result, the polishing liquid is intermittently supplied on the polishing pad [0063]; So, the at the first function during first time interval, the flow rate would be greater than the second function.
Regarding claim 13, Watanabe et al disclose that the flow rate of the polishing liquid is increased gradually from the initial value IF in a stepwise manner until the flow rate of the polishing liquid reaches the predetermined set value F. The controller 22 controls the regulator 16 such that the flow rate of the polishing liquid increases gradually in a stepwise manner [0054]; so, the flow rate of the polishing liquid is continuous during the first and second time intervals.
Regarding claims 14, Watanabe et al also disclose that the opening and closing operations of the on-off valve 20 are performed the predetermined number of times. As the opening and closing operations of the on-off valve 20 are repeated, supply of the polishing liquid and stop of the supply are repeated. As a result, the polishing liquid is intermittently supplied on the polishing pad [0063]; So, the flow rate of the polishing liquid is discontinuous.
Regarding claim 15, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to maintain the duration same in the first and second time intervals because such would keep the polishing uniformity.
Regarding claim 16, Kim et al disclose a manufacturing process of a memory device, including the step of forming patterns on a substrate, forming a layer covering the pattern (Figure 2B); an etch-back process or a chemical mechanical polish (CMP) process ([0046], Figure 2C); and such CMP resemble as the claimed “first planarization process”.
Kim et al also disclose that forming bit lines and landing pads electrically connected to source/drain region ([0049], Figure 3A,3B); Referring to FIG. 4B, the third interlayer dielectric IL3 may be formed between the bit lines 15 so as to fill spaces between the bit lines 15. In some embodiments, a silicon oxide layer, for example, may be deposited on the semiconductor substrate 11, on which the bit lines 15 are formed, and the planarization process may be performed using an etch-back method or a CMP method until surfaces of the capping layers 15b in the bit lines 15 are exposed [0058]; and such CMP resemble as the claimed second planarization.
Kim et al fail to disclose the slurry supplied at a different flow rates in each of the first time interval and the second time interval during the both first and the second polishing as required in the claim 16.
However, Watanabe et al disclose a manufacturing process of a semiconductor device, wherein a chemical mechanical polishing (or CMP). This chemical mechanical polishing (which will be hereinafter referred to as CMP) is performed with use of a polishing apparatus [0002]; As shown in FIG. 1, the polishing apparatus includes a polishing table 2 for supporting a polishing pad 1 thereon, a top ring 3 for pressing a substrate W, such as a wafer, against the polishing pad 1, and a polishing-liquid supply structure 4 for supplying a polishing liquid (or slurry) onto the polishing pad 1 [0039]; and rotating the polishing pad [0040].
Watanabe et al disclose that the flow rate of the polishing liquid is increased gradually from the initial value IF in a stepwise manner until the flow rate of the polishing liquid reaches the predetermined set value F. The controller 22 controls the regulator 16 such that the flow rate of the polishing liquid increases gradually in a stepwise manner [0054]; and aforesaid teaching obviously teach that the initial flow rate of the polishing liquid resemble as the claimed first time interval of the flow rate characterized by a first function and the increased flow rate of the liquid resemble as the claimed second time interval of the flow rate characterized by a second function, which is different than that of the first function as claimed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ Watanabe et al's teaching of supplying polishing liquid (slurry) into the teaching of Kim et al for efficient polishing the substrate by maintaining the physical quantity of the polishing liquid as suggested by Watanabe et al.
Regarding claims 17 and 19, Watanabe et al disclose that the flow rate of the polishing liquid (slurry) is gradually increasing [0054]; so, it would have been obvious that the first, second function is a function of time and the first, second and third time intervals occurs during the gradual increasing of the polishing liquid.
Regarding claims 18, Watanabe et al also disclose that the opening and closing operations of the on-off valve 20 are performed the predetermined number of times. As the opening and closing operations of the on-off valve 20 are repeated, supply of the polishing liquid and stop of the supply are repeated. As a result, the polishing liquid is intermittently supplied on the polishing pad [0063].
Regarding claim 20, Kim et al discloses that the semiconductor memory device 20 is completed in Figure 3B [0070]; and such device obviously constitute the capacitor as claimed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record, listed in the PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAMIM AHMED whose telephone number is (571)272-1457. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH (8-5:30pm).
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, Joshua Allen can be reached at 571-270-3176. 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.
SHAMIM AHMED
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1713
/SHAMIM AHMED/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713
Prosecution Insights