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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1, 3-20 are pending in this application, which is a CON of PCT/JP2023/025767. Amended claims 1, 3, 11 and canceled claim 2 are noted.
The amendment dated 06/24/2026 has been entered and carefully considered. The examiner appreciates the amendments to the title and claims. In view of said amendments, the 112 rejection has been withdrawn.
Claim 20 is withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a nonelected invention.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
It is noted that the claimed invention is directed solely to a method. The examiner suggests amending the title to reflect same.
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.
Claims 1, 9-13, 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueda et al. (2019/0333753) in view of Mayorga et al. (2015/0024608) and Kang et al. (2017/0263442).
Ueda teaches plasma enhanced atomic layer deposition of silicon nitride using silicon-hydrohalide precursors (title) having high side wall conformality (abstract, Figure 1). Specifically, a SiN deposition phase 312 comprises exposure to silicon precursor 370 and purge 380 followed by exposure to nitrogen plasma 390 and purge 392 (0010 and Figure 3). While the reference teaches the use of a plasma in the second reactant such as helium (0041-0043), the reference fails to teach a helium plasma with the supplying of the silicon and the nitrogen.
Mayorga teaches a method of depositing films using organoaminodisilane precursors (title) in which silicon nitride films are deposited via PEALD (0120). Specifically, a helium plasma is used (0151, claim 32). It would have been obvious to utilize a helium plasma in the process of Ueda with the expectation of success because Mayorga teaches of using a helium plasma to form silicon nitride films by PEALD.
With respect to changing conditions as cycles are increased, it is noted that Mayorga teaches that the PEALD process uses a helium plasma (0151) and affects the thickness as the number of cycles are increased (Figure 4). However, the references fail to teach stepwise increasing or decreasing a specific parameter.
Kang teaches a deposition method using plasma stabilization (title) in a PEALD process using a plasma to active a reactive gas and a source gas (0005). Specifically, the levels of plasma power may increase stepwise (0012). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to increase stepwise the plasma power in the process of Ueda because Kang teaches of stepwise increasing plasma power in a PEALD process.
Regarding claim 9, Mayorga teaches helium and nitrogen (0086).
Regarding claim 10, Mayorga teaches a nitrogen plasma (0085).
Regarding claim 11, Mayorga teaches a nitrogen plasma (0085) and Kang teaches increasing power stepwise (0012).
Regarding claims 12-13, Mayorga teaches nitrogen and an inert gas such as argon (0086).
Regarding claim 18, Mayorga teaches aminosilane (0003).
Regarding claim 19, Mayorga teaches a nitrogen plasma (0085).
Claims 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueda et al. (2019/0333753) and Mayorga et al. (2015/0024608) and Kang et al. (2017/0263442) and further in view of Hausmann et al. (9,670,579). The combination of Ueda/Mayorga/Kang fails to teach a halogen plasma.
Hausmann teaches of forming conformal SiN film (title) in which a plasma is utilized (col.4 lines 29-044, Figure 4). In one embodiment, an HF plasma is utilized (col.14 lines 37-63). It would have been obvious to incorporate an HF plasma in the combination with the expectation of success because Hausmann teaches of using an HF plasma to form a SiN film.
Regarding claim 15, Hausmann teaches HF (col.14 lines 37-63).
Regarding claim 16, Kang teaches increasing plasma power in a stepwise manner (0012).
Regarding claim 17, Ueda teaches nitrogen (0011) and Hausmann teaches HF (col.14 lines 37-63).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The prior art references fail to teach reducing a number of adsorption sites for a silicon precursor as recited in claim 3, from which claims 4-8 depend.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the references fail to teach actively changing the conditions for generating a plasma (p.3 1st paragraph).
The examiner disagrees. Kang specifically teaches of increasing plasma power stepwise (0012), which reads on the claimed limitation of power for generating the helium plasma.
Applicant next argues that Kang fails to teach stepwise increase during the actual deposition process but before the substrate is loaded (p.3 3rd paragraph – p.4 1st full paragraph).
The examiner disagrees. It is first noted that no deposition process is recited in independent claim 1. Hence, applicant’s arguments are not commensurate in scope with the instant claims as presently written. Secondly, the applicant requires the stepwise increase (or decrease) for generating the plasma (step b) but does not positively recite that this occurs during the filling process. However, assuming arguendo that the applicant’s assertion is correct that the stepwise increase occurs before the substrate is loaded, this still reads on the applicant’s claimed limitation as presently written.
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are not deemed persuasive.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRET CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1417. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-8:30 MT.
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.
/BRET P CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718 07/16/2026
Prosecution Insights