DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-18 and 20-21 are pending before the Office for review.
In the response filed August 27, 2026:
Claim 19 was canceled.
Claim 20-21 are newly added.
No new matter is present.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1 (claims 1-18 and 20-21) in the reply filed on August 27, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim 19 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on August 27, 2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 20 recited “The plasma processing apparatus according to claim 6” however the Examiner believes the claims should read as “The plasma processing method according to claim 6”. Appropriate correction is required.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 6-18 and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by SINGH et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0273705).
With regards to claim 1, Singh discloses a plasma processing method comprising: preparing a substrate (302) having a first etching film (310) and a mask (312) on the first etching film in a chamber, the mask including a metal-containing film (photoresist comprising at least one metal element); and generating plasma in the chamber with a processing gas including one or both of a chlorine containing gas and a bromine-containing gas to etch the first etching film (Paragraphs [0036]-[0037], [0042], [0055]-[0060] Figure 3A-3B discloses providing a substrate 302 with a film 210 and mask 312 wherein the mask 312 comprises a photoresist comprising at least one metal element; generating plasma in a chamber with a processing gas comprising a halogen containing gas which may include a chlorine containing gas or a bromide containing gas).
With regards to claim 2, Singh discloses wherein the metal containing film contains tin (Sn) (Paragraph [0037] photoresist comprising at least one metal element including tin).
With regards to claim 3, Singh discloses wherein the first etching film is a silicon (Si) containing film or a metal containing film (Paragraph [0042])
With regards to claim 6, Singh discloses wherein the chlorine containing gas and the bromine containing gas does not contain hydrogen nor fluorine (Paragraphs [0058]-[0060] discloses Br gas, CCl2).
With regards to claim 7, Singh discloses wherein the chlorine containing gas contains carbon (Paragraph [0058] discloses CCl2).
With regards to claim 8, Singh discloses wherein the first etching film includes a silicon oxide film (Paragraphs [0042], [0060] discloses SnSiO2).
With regards to claim 9, Singh discloses wherein the processing gas includes a chlorine containing as and the chlorine containing as includes at least one selected from the group consisting of Cl2, CxCly (x and y are an integer of 1 or more), and SijClk (j and k are an integer of 1 or more). (Paragraph [0058]).
With regards to claim 10, Singh discloses wherein the process gas includes an inert gas (Paragraph [0059])
With regards to claim 11, Singh discloses wherein the inert gas includes nitrogen gas (N2) or a helium gas (He) (Paragraphs [0058]-[0059]).
With regards to claim 12, Singh discloses wherein the substrate includes a second etching film (308) and the first etching film (310) is disposed on the second etching film (308), and the plasma processing method further includes, after etching the first etching film, etching the second etching film using at least the first etching film as a mask (Paragraph [0064]).
With regards to claim 13, Singh discloses wherein the process gas does not include an oxygen containing as (Paragraphs [0043], [0058] discloses oxygen gas is optional).
With regards to claim 14, Singh discloses wherein etching the first etching film includes setting a pressure in the chamber to 100 mTorr. (Paragraph [0061])
With regards to claim 15, Singh discloses wherein preparing the substrate includes disposing the substrate on a substrate support, and etching the first etching film includes supplying a bias RF signal to the substrate support, an effective value of power of the bias RF signal being 100 W or more. (Paragraphs [0032], [0061] discloses wherein the bias is sent to the substrate support; etching the first etching film includes a bias RF single to the substrate wherein the power is less than 500 watts such as 150 watts).
With regards to claim 16, Singh discloses wherein etching the first etching film includes setting a pressure in the chamber to 100 mTorr or less (Paragraph [0061] discloses 2 mTorr to about 100 mTorr).
With regards to claim 17, Singh discloses wherein etching the first etching film includes supplying a bias RF signal to the substrate support, an effective value of power of the bias RF signal being 200 W or less. (Paragraphs [0032], [0061] discloses wherein the bias is sent to the substrate support; etching the first etching film includes a bias RF single to the substrate wherein the power is less than 500 watts such as 150 watts).
With regards to claim 18, Singh discloses a plasma processing method that is executed in a plasma processing apparatus including a chamber (102) and a substrate support (148) disposed in the chamber, the plasma processing method comprising: preparing a substrate (302) having a first etching film (310) and a mask (312) on the first etching film on the substrate support, in which the mask includes a metal-containing film (photoresist comprising at least one metal element); and plasma etching the first etching film wherein the film comprises a metal other than tin and a processing gas comprising a chlorine containing gas or a bromine containing gas (Paragraphs [0036]-[0037], [0042], [0055]-[0060] Figure 3A-3B discloses providing a substrate 302 with a film 210 and mask 312 wherein the mask 312 comprises a photoresist comprising at least one metal element; generating plasma in a chamber with a processing gas comprising a halogen containing gas which may include a chlorine containing gas or a bromide containing gas) anticipating etching under a condition that tin fluoride is not formed on a surface of the mask. It is the Examiner’s position that one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that a processing condition absent tin and a fluorine containing gas anticipates a processing condition under which tin fluoride is not formed.
With regards to claim 20, Singh discloses wherein the first etching film is etched using a chlorine containing gas including CCl2 which anticipates wherein the first film is etched while suppressing generation of a fluoride of a metal (Paragraphs [0058]-[0060] discloses plasma etching using Br gas, CCl2). It is the Examiner’s position that one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that a processing condition absent a fluorine containing gas anticipates suppressing generation of a fluoride of a metal.
With regards to claim 21, Singh discloses a plasma processing method comprising: preparing a substrate (302) having a first etching film (308) including silicon carbide (Paragraph [0052]) and a mask (312) on the first etching film in a chamber, the mask including tin (photoresist comprising at least one metal element); generating plasma in the chamber with a process gas including a chlorine containing as and not containing fluorine nor hydrogen, to etch the first etching film without generating tin fluoride (Paragraphs [0036]-[0037], [0042], [0052]-[0060] Figure 3A-3B discloses providing a substrate 302 with a film 308 and mask 312 wherein the mask 312 comprises a photoresist comprising at least one metal element including tin; generating plasma in a chamber with a processing gas comprising a halogen containing gas which may include a chlorine containing gas to etch the silicon carbide BARC 308 wherein the BARC layer may be etched by a chlorine containing gas including Cl2) anticipating etching under a condition that tin fluoride is not formed on a surface of the mask. It is the Examiner’s position that one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that a processing condition absent a fluorine containing gas anticipates a processing condition under which tin fluoride is not formed.
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 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SINGH et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0273705).
With regards to claims 4-5, Singh discloses the limitations of claim 1 as previously discussed.
However Singh does not explicitly disclose wherein the first etching film is a silicon-containing film, wherein a ratio of the number of silicon atoms to the number of atoms other than silicon in the silicon-containing film is larger than a ratio of the number of silicon atoms to the number of atoms other than silicon in silicon oxide and wherein the first etching film includes at least one silicon-containing film selected from the group consisting of silicon carbide, amorphous silicon, and a silicon-containing antireflection film.
However Singh discloses wherein the first etching film is a hardmask layer including a metal containing material including a metal, silicon and oxygen wherein the dopants of silicon and/or oxygen elements in the metal containing hard mask assist in the reducing agglomeration during the lithographic exposure process, thus reducing likelihood of defects; wherein the ratio of metal elements to silicon or oxygen element may be controlled to about 80:1/19 and about 90:1/9 (Paragraph [0043]) rendering obvious wherein the first etching film is a silicon-containing film, wherein a ratio of the number of silicon atoms to the number of atoms other than silicon in the silicon-containing film is larger than a ratio of the number of silicon atoms to the number of atoms other than silicon in silicon oxide and wherein the first etching film includes at least one silicon-containing film selected from the group consisting of a silicon-containing antireflection film.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Singh to include ratio and the first etching silicon containing antireflective film as rendered obvious by the general teachings of Singh because the reference of Singh teaches that such layer provides film which reduced the likelihood of generating defects during lithograph exposure processes (Paragraph [0043]) and one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would have had a reasonable expectation of predictably achieving the desired plasma processing using the silicon containing film as rendered obvious by Singh. MPEP 2143D
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHANIE P. DUCLAIR whose telephone number is (571)270-5502. The examiner can normally be reached 9-6:30 M-F.
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.
/STEPHANIE P DUCLAIR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713
Prosecution Insights