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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-12 and 14-20 are pending and rejected. Claim 13 is withdrawn.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species A1 in the reply filed on 3/18/2026 is acknowledged. Claim 13 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 3/18/2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 101. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 5-7, 9, 10, 12, and 15 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.
Regarding claims 5-7, 9, 10, 12, and 15, the claims include the phrase “for example” or “e.g.”, which renders the claims indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). For the purposes of examination, the claims are being interpreted as though the limitations following “for example” or “e.g.” are not required. Appropriate action is required without adding new matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 1-12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Clark, US 2007/0235821 A1 and for claims 4 and 8 as evidenced by van Druenen, US 2022/0189775 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Clark teaches a method for forming a rare-earth-containing layer (a method for forming mixed rare earth-based films, 0027), the method comprising:
providing a substrate within a process chamber (disposing a substrate in a process chamber, 0109 and Fig. 5A); and
depositing the rare-earth-containing layer over the substrate (forming a mixed rare earth oxynitride film as a gate dielectric on the substrate, where the substrate is exposed to gases for forming the film, such that the rare-earth-containing layer will be formed over the substrate, 0009, 0012, 0108-0109 and Fig. 5A), the method of depositing the rare-earth-containing layer comprising:
providing a rare-earth precursor into the process chamber (exposing the substrate to a gas pulse of a first rare earth precursor, where the substrate is in the chamber, such that the gas will be provided to the chamber, 0109 and Fig. 5A),
providing a metal precursor into the process chamber (supplying a gas pulse of a second rare earth precursor, where the substrate is in the chamber, such that the gas will be provided to the chamber, 0109 and Fig. 5A), and
providing one or more non-metal element reactants into the process chamber (supplying at least one gas pulse containing oxygen and at least one gas pulse containing nitrogen to incorporate oxygen and nitrogen into the film, where the oxygen-containing gas includes O2, H2O, H2O2, NO, NO2, N2O, ozone, etc., and the nitrogen-containing gas can contain NH3, N2H4, NO, NO2, N2O, etc., 0109 and Fig. 5A, such that one or more non-metal element reactants are provided to the chamber),
wherein the rare-earth-containing layer comprises a rare-earth element, a metal element different from the rare-earth element, a first non-metal element, and a second non-metal element different from the first non-metal element (where the film is a mixed rare earth oxynitride film with the formula RE1xRE2yOmNn, where x, y, m, and n are non-zero numbers and RE1 and RE2 are different rare earth metal elements, 0110).
Regarding claim 2, Clark teaches the process of claim 1. They further teach that RE1 and RE2 are different and are each rare earth metal elements selected from Y, Lu, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Th, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, and Yb (0012).
Regarding claims 3 and 5, Clark teaches the process of claim 1. As noted above for claim 2, they teach that the rare earth metal elements are selected from Y, Lu, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Th, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, and Yb (0012). They teach that the rare earth precursors may have the formula ML1L2L3Dx, where M is a rare earth element selected from the group of Y, Lu, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, and Yb (0036). They teach that each ligand L1, L2, and L3 may be selected from a group including cyclopentadienyls (0036), such that the rare-earth precursor comprises a cyclopentadienyl ligand.
Regarding claims 4 and 8, Clark teaches the process of claim 1. They teach using Y precursors such as Cp3Y, (MeCp)3Y, La precursors such as Cp3La, Ce precursors such as ((iPr)Cp)3Ce, Cp3Ce, Pr precursors such as Cp3Pr (0043), etc. (0040-0043) so as to provide rare-earth metal and metal precursors having a +3-oxidation state as evidenced by van Druenen (0109).
Regarding claim 6, Clark teaches the process of claim 1. They further teach that RE1 and RE2 are different and are each rare earth metal elements selected from Y, Lu, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Th, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, and Yb (0012), such that the metal element is selected from lanthanides such as cerium, dysprosium, erbium, europium, gadolinium, holmium, lanthanum, lutetium, neodymium, praseodymium, samarium, thulium, and ytterbium.
Regarding claims 7 and 9, Clark teaches the process of claim 1. They teach that the rare earth precursors may have the formula ML1L2L3Dx, where M is a rare earth element selected from the group of Y, Lu, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, and Yb (0036). They teach that each ligand L1, L2, and L3 may be selected from a group including cyclopentadienyls (0036). Therefore, the metal precursor will comprise a lanthanide such as cerium, dysprosium, erbium, europium, gadolinium, holmium, lanthanum, lutetium, neodymium, praseodymium, samarium, thulium, and ytterbium and will include a cyclopentadienyl ligand.
Regarding claim 10, Clark teaches the process of claim 1. They further teach that the first non-metal element and/or the second non-metal element is selected from the group consisting of group 15 non-metals (nitrogen) and group 16 non-metals (oxygen) (0012, 0109, and Fig. 5A).
Regarding claims 11 and 12, Clark teaches the process of claim 1. They further teach providing a first non-metal reactant, i.e., and oxygen-containing reactant such as O2, H2O, ozone, etc. and a second non-metal element reactant different from the first non-metal element reactant, i.e., NH3, N2H4 (0109). Therefore, one of the first non-metal element reactant and the second non-metal element reactant is selected from the group consisting of group 15 non-metals (nitrogen) and group 16 non-metals (oxygen), where the reactants can be different from one another.
Regarding claim 14, Clark teaches the process of claim 1. They further teach that the substrate includes an interface layer 94 that is an oxide layer, a nitride layer, or an oxynitride layer and is formed between the rare-earth based film and the substrate (0153 and Fig. 9B). Therefore, the substrate will include a dielectric layer extending along a portion of an outer surface.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
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.
Claims 1-7, 9-12, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by or in the alternatively under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van Druenen, US 2022/0189775 A1 (provided on the IDS of 10/29/2024).
Regarding claim 1, van Druenen teaches a method for forming a rare-earth-containing layer (methods for depositing rare earth metal carbide containing layers, abstract), the method comprising:
providing a substrate within a process chamber (providing a substrate to a reaction chamber, 0181 and Fig. 11); and
depositing the rare-earth-containing layer over the substrate (depositing a rare earth metal carbide containing layer, 0181 and Fig. 11), the method of depositing the rare-earth-containing layer comprising:
providing a rare-earth precursor into the process chamber (providing a first precursor pulse in which a rare earth metal precursor is provided to the reaction chamber, 0181 and Fig. 11),
providing a metal precursor into the process chamber (providing a second precursor pulse in which a transition metal precursor is provided to the reaction chamber, 0181 and Fig. 11), and
providing one or more non-metal element reactants into the process chamber (where after the first precursor pulse, a first reactant pulse is provided in which a carbon reactant is provided to the reaction chamber, where the carbon reactant can be a halogenated C1 to C6 alkane or alkene, 0017, 0181, and Fig. 11, and after the second precursor pulse a second reactant pulse is performed to supply a nitrogen reactant such as N-2 or NH3, 0181 and Fig. 11),
wherein the rare-earth-containing layer comprises a rare-earth element, a metal element different from the rare-earth element, a first non-metal element, and a second non-metal element different from the first non-metal element (where since the process provides the rare-earth element precursor, the metal precursor, a carbon precursor, and a nitrogen precursor, the resulting film is expected to include the rare-earth metal, the transition metal, carbon, and nitrogen, further they indicate that the first sub-cycle provides a rare-earth carbide sublayer, 0181).
Alternatively, for the 103 rejection, while they do not specifically teach that the film includes the transition metal and nitrogen, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the film will include the rare-earth element, the metal element, carbon, and nitrogen, since such precursors and reactants are provided and further they indicate that the film can include nitrogen, 0139).
Regarding claims 2 and 3, van Druenen teaches or suggests the process of claim 1. They further teach that any rare-earth metal precursor mentioned can be used in the first precursor pulse (0181). They teach that the rare-earth precursor is selected from precursors of lanthanum, yttrium, erbium, samarium, europium, ytterbium, gadolinium, neodymium, and cerium (0103), such that the rare earth element will be and the rare-earth precursor will comprise lanthanum, yttrium, erbium, samarium, europium, ytterbium, gadolinium, neodymium, or cerium.
Regarding claim 4, van Druenen teaches or suggests the process of claim 1. They further teach that any rare-earth metal precursor mentioned can be used in the first precursor pulse (0181). They teach that the rare-earth precursor comprises a rare-earth element in an oxidation state of +3 or +4 (0010).
Regarding claim 5, van Druenen teaches or suggests the process of claim 1. They further teach that any rare-earth metal precursor mentioned can be used in the first precursor pulse (0181). They teach that the rare-earth precursor comprises a substituted or unsubstituted cyclopentadienyl ligand (0012).
Regarding claims 6 and 7, van Druenen teaches or suggests the process of claim 1. They further teach that any transition metal precursor mentioned can be used in the second precursor pulse (0181). They teach using transition metal precursors such as precursors of iron, titanium, and vanadium (0103). Therefore, the metal element will be selected from a group 4 metal (titanium), a group 5 metal (vanadium), or a group 8 metal (iron), such that the metal precursor comprises a group 4 metal (titanium), a group 5 metal (vanadium), or a group 8 metal (iron).
Regarding claim 9, van Druenen teaches or suggests the process of claim 1. They further teach that titanium, iron, vanadium precursors are further precursors that are provided in the process where the further precursor comprises a substituted or unsubstituted cyclopentadienyl ligand (0103). Therefore, when using a transition metal precursor such as titanium, iron, or vanadium, the precursor will include a cyclopentadienyl or unsubstituted cyclopentadienyl ligand.
Regarding claim 10, van Druenen teaches or suggests the process of claim 1. They further teach that the first non-metal element and/or the second non-metal element is selected from a group 14 non-metal (carbon) or a group 15 non-metal (nitrogen) (0181). Therefore, the first non-metal element and/ or the second non-metal element is taught or suggested to be a group 14 non-metal (carbon) or a group 15 non-metal (nitrogen).
Regarding claims 11 and 12, van Druenen teaches or suggests the process of claim 1. They further teach providing a first reactant pulse using a carbon reactant and a second reactant pulse including a nitrogen reactant (0181), such that a first non-metal element reactant is provided and a second non-metal element reactant is provided, where the first comprises a group 14 non-metal (carbon) and the second comprises a group 15 non-metal (nitrogen). They teach that the carbon reactant is a halogenated alkane or alkene and the nitrogen reactant is N2 or NH3 (0017 and 0181), such that the first and second non-metal reactants are different.
Regarding claim 14, van Druenen teaches or suggests the process of claim 1. They further teach that the substrate has a gate dielectric 420 on the surface (0167 and Fig. 4). They teach that the gate electrode 430 has a first conductive layer 431, a rare-earth metal carbide containing layer 432, and a second conductive layer 433 (0167 and Fig. 4). They teach depositing the first conductive layer on the gate dielectric (0008). Therefore, prior to depositing the first conductive layer, the substrate will have an outer surface comprising a dielectric layer extending along the outer surface (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 15, van Druenen teaches or suggests the process of claim 14. They further teach that the dielectric layer comprises a high-k material such as hafnium oxide, tantalum oxide, zirconium oxide, etc. (0167).
Regarding claim 16, van Druenen teaches or suggests the process of claim 1. They teach depositing a first conductive layer prior to forming the rare-earth-containing layer (0008).
Regarding claim 17, van Druenen teaches or suggests the process of claim 16. They further teach that the first conductive layer comprises a first transition metal compound (0021).
Regarding claims 18-20, van Druenen teaches or suggests the process of claim 17. They further teach that the first conductive layer comprises a first transition metal carbide or nitride such as titanium nitride or titanium carbide (0021-0022 and 0025-0026). They teach that the first conductive layer can be TiN, ZrN, HfN, VN, NbN, TaN, ScN, CrN, MoN, WN, TiC, VC, HfC, TaC, ZrC, ScC, or NbC (0132 and 0134). Therefore, the first transition metal compound comprises a first non-metal constituent element that is different from the first non-metal element or the second non-metal element and a metal element that can be different from the rare-earth element and/or the metal element.
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.
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.
Claims 4, 8, 11, and 12 are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark, US 2007/0235821 A1 and for claims 4 and 8 as evidenced by van Druenen, US 2022/0189775 A1.
Regarding claims 4 and 8, as discussed above for claims 4 and 8, Clark teaches using Y precursors such as Cp3Y, (MeCp)3Y, La precursors such as Cp3La, Ce precursors such as ((iPr)Cp)3Ce, Cp3Ce, Pr precursors such as Cp3Pr (0043), etc. (0040-0043) from a list of various precursors. From this, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected using such precursors for the rare-earth and metal precursors because Clark teaches that such precursors are desirable. Therefore, they suggest selecting rare-earth metal and metal precursors having a +3-oxidation state as evidenced by van Druenen (0109).
Regarding claims 11 and 12, as discussed above, Clark teaches selecting various oxygen-containing and nitrogen-containing precursors (0109). They teach that gases that include both nitrogen and oxygen can be used such as NO, NO2, etc. (0109). They also teach using gases that do not contain nitrogen as the oxygen reactant and gases that do no contain oxygen as the nitrogen reactant (0109). From this, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected different first and second reactants such as O2 and NH3 because Clark teaches that such reactants are suitable for use to incorporate nitrogen and oxygen.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van Druenen as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen, US 2022/0285147 A1.
Regarding claim 8, van Druenen teaches or suggests the process of claim 1. As noted above for claims 6 and 7, they teach using iron, titanium, or vanadium as the transition metals.
They do not teach the oxidation state of the metal precursor.
Chen teaches methods for depositing layers comprising a titanium, aluminum, and carbon (abstract). They teach that the process is cyclical (abstract). They teach that a deposition cycle comprises an aluminum precursor pulse and a transition metal precursor pulse (0057). They teach that the transition metal precursor comprises at least one of vanadium, titanium, etc. (0083). They teach that the transition metal precursor can comprise a transition metal in any suitable oxidation state, where the oxidation state can be +2, +3, +4, or +5 (0086). They teach that the transition metal precursor comprises a metal in an oxidation state of +4 (0086). They teach that the transition metal can be titanium in a +4-oxidation state (0086).
From the teachings of Chen, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the process of van Druenen to have used vanadium or titanium in an oxidation state of +2, +3, +4, or +5 and to specifically have used titanium in a +4 oxidation state because Chen teaches that such oxidation states are suitable for titanium and vanadium precursors for the deposition of a vanadium or titanium containing layer by a cyclical process such that it will be expected to provide desirable oxidation states for the precursors. Therefore, the oxidation state will overlap or be within the claimed range. According to MPEP 2131.03, “[W]hen, as by a recitation of ranges or otherwise, a claim covers several compositions, the claim is ‘anticipated’ if one of them is in the prior art.” According to MPEP 2144.05, “in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINA D MCCLURE whose telephone number is (571)272-9761. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30-5:00 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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at 571-272-5166. 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.
/CHRISTINA D MCCLURE/ Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Prosecution Insights