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 1-20 pending
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-9, 13-15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vayrynen (WO 2020/002995 A1).
Consider Claim 1, Vayrynen teaches the process of depositing intermetallic compound on a substrate using cyclic deposition process (last paragraph, page 32) where the intermetallic compound include transitional metals (3rd paragraph, page 27), where the process includes providing a substrate in the reaction chamber (1st paragraph, page 33); providing 1st gas phase reaction comprising 1st metal to the reaction chamber (1st paragraph, page 33), where the 1st gas phase reactant comprises, (adduct)n-M-Xa (lines 17-35 page 11); providing a 2nd gas phase reactant into the reaction chamber (2nd paragraph, page 33), where the 2nd gas phase reactant include radicals such as arsenic, bismuth (paragraph 9, page 34); where the transitional metal compound comprises transitional metal M, including nickel and or cobalt and an adduct forming ligand (lines 17-35, page 11).
Consider Claims 2-3, Vayrynen teaches the adduct ligand include bidentate nitrogen comprising adduct ligand comprising 2 nitrogen atoms, each of the nitrogen atoms bonded to at least one carbon atom (paragraphs 29-30, page 35).
Consider Claim 4, Vayrynen teaches the process where the transitional metal is heteroleptic transitional metal precursor (1st gas phase reactant comprises nan halogen containing metal precursor, (lines 23-25, page 13) and where the non-halogen containing precursor include the general formula seen in page 14, lines 15- 20, page 14).
Consider Claim 6, Vayrynen teaches the transitional metal include cobalt or nickel (lines 23-24, page 11).
Consider Claim 7, Vayrynen teaches the adduct ligand is cyclic adduct ligand (line 31, page 11).
Consider Claim 8, Vayrynen teaches the transitional metal compound comprises halogen (lines 17- 24, page 11).
Consider Claim 9, Vayrynen teaches the adduct ligand coordinator transitional metal through at least nitrogen atom, phosphorus atom, oxygen atom, or sulfur atom (lines 26- 30, page 11).
Consider Claim 13, Vayrynen teaches the 2nd precursor comprises arsenic (paragraph 9, page 34).
Consider Claim 14, Vayrynen teaches the 2nd precursor comprises alkyl group (2nd gas phase reactant have general formula R-M-H (paragraph 8, page 33), where R is an alkyl group (paragraph 15, page 34)).
Consider Claim 15, Vayrynen teaches the transitional metal precursor/1st gas phase reactant and the second precursor provided in a reactant chamber with temperature of less than 250℃ (paragraph 6, page 33), and where first and second gas phase reactant (following method 100 – method 200 of figures 1-2) are pulse of sequential and alternating (lines 5-7, page 23).
Consider Claim 20, Vayrynen teaches the previously taught in claim 1, additionally, Vayrynen teaches the formed intermetallic compound is an element (one element) (lines 12-24, page 7), where the process include the using of reducing agent (3rd vapor phase reactant) (lines 16-18, page 25) that is introduced with 1st gas phase reactant as co-flowed into the reaction chamber (lines 27-30, page 25).
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.
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) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vayrynen (WO 2020/002995 A1) in view of Byun (PG Pub 2021/020438 A1).
Consider Claim 12, Vayrynen teaches the first precursor (transitional metal precursor) react with second precursor (see claim 1), using ALD process (line 14, page 6).
Vayrynen does not teach the claimed compound.
However, Byun teaches the process of forming transitional metal film on a substrate using transitional metal precursor with organic material (abstract) using ALD process [0019], teaches the organic material include hydrogen telluride (H2Te), dimethyl telluride (CH3)2Te, and (Et3Si)2Te (claim 9).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention would combine Vayrynen with Byun to use the above Telluride precursors, to synthesize transition metal dichalcogenide with an easy process and a desired thickness [0095].
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-6, 8-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 12,209,305 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Claim 1 state: A method of forming a transition metal comprising material on a substrate by a cyclic deposition process, the method comprising:
providing a substrate in a reaction chamber;
providing a transition metal precursor comprising a transition metal compound in the reaction chamber; and
providing a second precursor in the reaction chamber,
wherein the transition metal compound comprises a transition metal and one or more adduct forming ligands, and
wherein the second precursor comprises radicals comprising tellurium, arsenic or bismuth.
Where this is disclosed in claim 1 of US Pat. ‘305.
Additionally, Claim 20 state: A method of forming a transition metal-comprising material on a substrate by a cyclic deposition process, the method comprising:
providing a substrate in a reaction chamber;
providing a transition metal precursor comprising a transition metal and one or more adduct forming ligands in the reaction chamber;
providing a second precursor in the reaction chamber; and
contacting the transition metal-comprising material with a reducing agent thereby forming an elemental transition metal,
wherein the second precursor comprises radicals comprising tellurium, arsenic or bismuth.
Where this is in claim 19 of US Pat. ‘305.
Additionally, Claims 2-6 and 8-19 are disclosed in claims 2-18 of US Pat. ‘305.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mohammad Mayy whose telephone number is (571)272-9983. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8:00AM-5:00PM 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.
/Mohammad Mayy/
Art Unit 1718
/GORDON BALDWIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1718