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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I (claims 1-18) in the reply filed on 02/03/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the restriction is improper because Applicant filed a preliminary amendment which included cancelling claims 19-34; the previous Examiner (B. Chen) discussed with Applicant, and suggested to Applicant to file a response to expedite examination of the present Application.
Current Examiner (C. Bennett) is hereby withdrawing the restriction filed by Examiner Chen (01/27/2026), as original claims 19-34 were cancelled before examination.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 11-15, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20120036732 to Varadarajan in view of US 20090305515 to Ho.
Claims 1-7, 15, 18: Varadarajan discloses a multiple-chamber reactor system comprising: a first reaction chamber (62-1 [station or chamber], Fig. 2); a second reaction chamber (62-2 [station or chamber]) configured to expose the deposited layer to vacuum ultraviolet radiation (para. [0070]); and a controller (48 [controller], Fig. 1) configured to: provide the substrate comprising at least one gap within the first reaction chamber (62-1, para. [0045]); move the substrate from the first chamber to the second reaction chamber; and perform an exposure process in the second reaction chamber (para. [para. [0046-0048]).
The apparatus of Varadarajan does not explicitly disclose (claim 1) the first chamber configured to deposit a layer comprising silicon into at least one gap on a substrate to form a deposited layer; perform a deposition cycle in the first reaction chamber; (claim 2) wherein the controller is configured to execute a plurality of the deposition cycles in the first reaction chamber prior to moving the substrate from the first chamber to the second reaction chamber; (claim 3) wherein the controller is further configured to move the substrate from the second reaction chamber to the first reaction chamber; (claim 4) wherein the vacuum ultraviolet radiation converts the deposited layer a converted layer, wherein the system further comprising comprises a third reaction chamber to treat the converted layer, and wherein the controller is configured to move the substrate from the first or second reaction chamber to the third reaction chamber; and perform an anneal treatment process in the third reaction chamber;
(claim 5) wherein the deposition cycle comprises: pulsing a silicon precursor from a silicon precursor source to the first reaction chamber; and providing a deposition plasma power to form activated species from a reactant to deposit a layer comprising silicon nitride; (claim 6) wherein the deposition cycle comprises: pulsing a silicon precursor from a silicon precursor source to the first reaction chamber; pulsing a carbon precursor from a carbon precursor source to the first reaction chamber; and providing a deposition plasma power to form activated species from a reactant to deposit a layer comprising silicon carbon nitride;
(claim 7) wherein the deposition cycle comprises: pulsing a silicon precursor from a silicon precursor source to the first reaction chamber; and providing a deposition plasma power to form activated species from a reactant to deposit a layer comprising silicon oxide; (claim 15) further comprising a fourth reaction chamber, wherein the controller is further configured to deposit an additional layer comprising silicon on the surface of the converted layer or the surface of the treated converted layer, and wherein the controller is further configured to move the substrate from the first reaction chamber to the second reaction chamber, from the second reaction chamber to the third reaction chamber, and from the third reaction chamber to the fourth reaction chamber; (claim 18) wherein the vacuum ultraviolet radiation cures any seams formed in the deposited layer.
However Varadarajan discloses the controller is configured to execute control programs to expose the deposited layer to ultraviolet radiation (para. [0042-0062]), for multiple cycles, in different chambers as necessary, as the controller of Varadarajan controls the robot to transfer the substrate between any of the chambers (62-1 through 62-4, para. [0042-0047]) for the purpose of densifying a deposited layer of a substrate (para. [0015]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the controller requirements for conversions/exposures and transfers as taught by Varadarajan with motivation to densify a deposited layer of a substrate.
Ho discloses multiple deposition cycles comprising: pulsing a silicon and/or carbon precursor from a silicon and/or carbon precursor source to any reaction chamber (para. [0051-0053], [0029-0033], [0008]); and providing a deposition plasma power to form activated species from a reactant to deposit a layer comprising different films (para. [0039-0040], [0051-0053]), wherein the vacuum ultraviolet radiation cures any seams formed in the deposited layer (para. [0028-0032]), for the purpose of improving control, uniformity, and throughput over prior art methods and processes (para. [0064]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the deposition and plasma power requirements as taught by Ho with motivation to improve control, uniformity, and throughput over prior art methods and processes.
Claim 11: The apparatus of Varadarajan in view of Ho discloses wherein the vacuum ultraviolet radiation is provided by an excimer lamp (para. [0043], Varadarajan, where Xe2 is an excimer lamp at 172 nm).
Claim 12: The apparatus of Varadarajan in view of Ho discloses where the vacuum ultraviolet radiation is provided by ultraviolet light source low pressure mercury lamp (para. [0043], Varadarajan).
Claim 13: The apparatus of Varadarajan in view of Ho discloses wherein the wavelength of the vacuum ultraviolet radiation is 100-450 nm (para. [0043], Varadarajan).
Claim 14: The apparatus of Varadarajan in view of Ho discloses wherein a wavelength of the vacuum ultraviolet radiation is 172 nm (para. [0043], Varadarajan).
Claim(s) 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Varadarajan in view of Ho as applied to claims 1-7, 11-15, 18 above, and further in view of US 20100151694 to Peuse.
Claims 8-10: The apparatus of Varadarajan in view of Ho does not disclose (claim 8) wherein the exposure to vacuum ultraviolet radiation converts the layer comprising silicon nitride to a converted layer comprising silicon oxide; (claim 9) wherein the exposure to vacuum ultraviolet radiation converts the layer comprising silicon carbon nitride to a converted layer comprising silicon oxycarbon nitride; (claim 10) wherein the conversion process comprises oxidizing the deposited layer with vacuum ultraviolet induced ozone and reactive oxygen species.
However Peuse teaches use of UV radiation enhancement of the substrate, generated in the plasma employed for the generation of radicals from feed gases for the purpose of enhancing Si--Si bond breakage thus increasing Si bonding sides to form Si—O (para. [0057]). In this way silicon nitride is more probable to be converted to silicon oxide. Further, it is noted that the limitations in claims 8-10 are intended results of using UV radiation, thus do not hold patentable weight.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporatethe UV radiation enhancement as taught by Peuse with motivation to enhance Si--Si bond breakage thus increasing Si bonding sides to form Si—O.
Claim(s) 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Varadarajan in view of Ho as applied to claims 1-7, 11-15, 18 above, and further in view of US 20180119283 to Fukazawa.
Claims 16-17: The apparatus of Varadarajan in view of Ho does not disclose (claim 16) wherein the controller is further configured to ramp up a flow of an oxygen-containing reactant after the substrate is within the second reaction chamber; (claim 17) wherein the controller is further configured to ramp down the-a flow of oxygen-containing reactant before the substrate is removed from the second reaction chamber.
Fukazawa discloses that after deposition, the controller (para. [0050]) is configured to increase or decrease oxygen-containing reactant in a chamber (para. [0035]), for the purpose of improving film properties in a significantly short period of time (para. [0035]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the limitations above as taught by Fukazawa with motivation to improve film properties in a significantly short period of time.
Claims 19-34: (Cancelled).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 8173537 discloses transferring a wafer to different stations for processing steps such as UV treatment and dielectric deposition (c. 15, l. 50-65). US 20230399745 discloses transferring a wafer to different stations for processing steps such as UV treatment and different deposition processes and repeating the steps (Fig. 7B, para. [0127], [0082-0084]) by same assignee.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Charlee J. C. Bennett whose telephone number is (571)270-7972. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10am-6pm.
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.
/Charlee J. C. Bennett/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Prosecution Insights