CTNF 19/110,207 CTNF 74195 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 are pending in this application, which is a 371 of PCT/US2023/073490. Election/Restrictions 08-25 AIA Applicant's election with traverse of claims 1-13 in the reply filed on 05/18/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the reference fails to teach removing by reacting with fluorine containing species (p.10 last paragraph) . This is not found persuasive because the claims don’t recite a fluorine containing species . The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claims 14-20 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a nonelected invention. Specification 06-16 AIA Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details. The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc . In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided. It is noted that the abstract begins with “Examples are disclosed that relate”. The examiner suggests its deletion. 06-11 AIA 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 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-6, 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang et al. (2019/0348273) in view of Ha et al. (2012/0164846) . Tang teaches a method for depositing an oxide film on a substrate by cyclical deposition (title) in which a metal oxide is deposited over a substrate utilizing at least one deposition cycle of a first sub-cycle of the cyclical deposition process; and depositing a silicon oxide film directly on the metal oxide film utilizing at least one deposition cycle of a second sub-cycle of the cyclical deposition process (abstract, Figure 1). The metal oxide sub-cycle comprises exposing the substrate to a first metal precursor and a second precursor containing oxygen while the silicon oxide sub-cycle comprises exposing the substrate to a silicon vapor phase precursor and a second precursor such as hydrogen peroxide (0035). In one embodiment, etching occurred after the deposition of the oxide film (0015) and a patterned substrate can be achieved (0044-0045, Figures 6, 10). However, the reference fails to teach the molybdenum oxide or tungsten oxide. Ha teaches a method of forming oxide hardmask (title) in which a metal oxide and silicon oxide are alternatively depositing by ALD (0044). The metal oxide can be titanium oxide or tungsten oxide (0055). It would have been obvious to utilize tungsten oxide in the process of Tang with the expectation of success because Ha teaches of forming tungsten oxide by an ALD process. Regarding claim 2, Tang teaches a plurality of cycles which can be repeated (0028). Regarding claim 3, the applicant requires a greater number of silicon oxide subcycles. It is noted that Tang teaches a plurality of metal oxide subcycles and silicon oxide subcycles (0028, 0035). To utilize more silicon oxide subcycles would have been obvious in the absence of a showing of criticality. Regarding claim 4, the applicant requires a greater number of metal oxide subcycles. It is noted that Tang teaches a plurality of metal oxide subcycles and silicon oxide subcycles (0028, 0035). To utilize more metal oxide subcycles would have been obvious in the absence of a showing of criticality. Regarding claim 5, Tang teaches the same number of subcycles (0028). Regarding claim 6, Ha teaches a spacer (0003-0008). Regarding claim 8, Ha teaches tungsten (0055). Regarding claim 9, Tang teaches metal halide (0050) and Ha teaches tungsten (0055). Given both teachings, it would have been obvious to utilize tungsten halide in the absence of a showing of unexpected results. Regarding claim 10, Ha teaches a modulus of 70 to 400 GPa (0064). Regarding claim 11, the applicant requires a specific width. Tang teaches a width of 30 nm (0090). To vary the width would have been obvious depending on the desired final product. Regarding claim 12, Tang teaches 3.9 nm (0087). Regarding claim 13, Ha teaches fluorine (0039) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang et al. (2019/0348273) in view of Ha et al. (2012/0164846) and further in view of Stacy et al. (2015/0364739) . The combination of Tang/Ha fails to teach removing a mandrel . Stacy teaches of forming an aluminum oxide film (title) on a substrate (0008) and then removing the substrate to form a free standing oxide film (0035). To remove the substrate would have been obvious in the combination depending on the desired use of the final product because Stacy teaches of forming a freestanding oxide film by removing the substrate. 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 06/15/2026 Application/Control Number: 19/110,207 Page 2 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 19/110,207 Page 3 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 19/110,207 Page 4 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 19/110,207 Page 5 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 19/110,207 Page 6 Art Unit: 1718
Prosecution Insights