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 .
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.
Claim 7 is 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. The claim is confusing because claim 1 mentions only a tungsten corrosion inhibitor, but claim 7 is removing a titanium-containing film. Tungsten and oxide films are mentioned as well. Is this just a listing of films, or is there an actual claim limitation with respect to films removed?
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.
(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 1-5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Stender et al, US 2025/0019568.
Stender et al teach a CMP composition for tungsten-containing semiconductors (see abstract) comprising hydrogen peroxide, cetyltrimethylammonium hydroxide and the balance water with a pH of 2.3 (¶209). As this reference meets all material limitations of the claims at hand, the reference is anticipatory.
Claims 1, 2, 4, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Narita, US 2010/0210184.
Narita teaches a CMP composition comprising hydrogen peroxide, lauryltrimethylammonium chloride and the balance water with a pH of 5.5 (¶132, example 10). As this reference meets all material limitations of the claims at hand, the reference is anticipatory.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lauter et al, US 2022/0267643.
Lauter et al teach a composition for tungsten etching inhibition comprising hydrogen peroxide, benzethonium chloride and the balance water with a pH of 6 (¶330, example 11). As this reference meets all material limitations of the claims at hand, the reference is anticipatory.
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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong et al, US 2022/0049160.
Hong et al teach a composition for etching titanium nitride comprising benzyl dimethyl lauryl ammonium chloride, periodic acid, and the balance water (¶77, example 1), wherein the composition has a pH as low as 1 (claim 2) and so it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to formulate example 1 with a pH of 1 with confidence of forming an effective semiconductor treatment liquid as this pH is taught as suitable by the reference.
Claims 1, 2, 4, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horie et al, US 2023/0365893.
Horie et al teach a cleaning composition for semiconductors comprising hydrogen peroxide, benzyltrimethylammonium hydroxide and the balance water wherein the composition has a pH of 8.7 (¶179, example 11). These compositions may have a pH as low as 7 (claim 4) and so it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to formulate example 11 with a pH of 7 with confidence of forming an effective semiconductor cleaner as this pH is taught as suitable by the reference.
With respect to claim 7, both titanium and tungsten metals are cleaned with this composition (see table 7).
Claims 1, 2, 4, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikkawa et al, US 2022/0298416.
Kikkawa et al teach a treatment liquid for semiconductors comprising tetradecyltrimethylammonium bromide, ortho-periodic acid, and the balance water (¶156, example 13), and when the composition contains periodate ions, the pH is as low as 1 (¶50) and so it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to formulate example 13 with a pH of 1 with confidence of forming an effective semiconductor treatment liquid as this pH is taught as suitable by the reference.
With respect to claim 7, these treatment liquids are tested wafers in which tungsten is deposited (see examples 15 and 17).
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al, US 2015/0021513.
Kim et al teach a CMP slurry comprising benzalkonium chloride (contains a benzyl group and a C12-14 alkyl group and so satisfies claim 6), perchloric acid, and the balance water (¶59 example 4), wherein these compositions have a preferred pH of from 2.2 to 3 (¶61) and so it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to formulate example 4 with a pH of 2.2 to 3 with confidence of forming an effective semiconductor treatment liquid as this pH is taught as preferred by the reference.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Obviously, compositions containing cationic surfactants and bleaching agents are ubiquitous in the detergent arts. The examiner has focused on semiconductor treatment compositions to avoid an onerous action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES I BOYER whose telephone number is (571)272-1311. The examiner can normally be reached M-S 10-430.
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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at 5712722817. 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.
/CHARLES I BOYER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
