DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restriction
REQUIREMENT FOR UNITY OF INVENTION
As provided in 37 CFR 1.475(a), a national stage application shall relate to one invention only or to a group of inventions so linked as to form a single general inventive concept (“requirement of unity of invention”). Where a group of inventions is claimed in a national stage application, the requirement of unity of invention shall be fulfilled only when there is a technical relationship among those inventions involving one or more of the same or corresponding special technical features. The expression “special technical features” shall mean those technical features that define a contribution which each of the claimed inventions, considered as a whole, makes over the prior art.
The determination whether a group of inventions is so linked as to form a single general inventive concept shall be made without regard to whether the inventions are claimed in separate claims or as alternatives within a single claim. See 37 CFR 1.475(e).
When Claims Are Directed to Multiple Categories of Inventions:
As provided in 37 CFR 1.475 (b), a national stage application containing claims to different categories of invention will be considered to have unity of invention if the claims are drawn only to one of the following combinations of categories:
(1) A product and a process specially adapted for the manufacture of said product; or
(2) A product and a process of use of said product; or
(3) A product, a process specially adapted for the manufacture of the said product, and a use of the said product; or
(4) A process and an apparatus or means specifically designed for carrying out the said process; or
(5) A product, a process specially adapted for the manufacture of the said product, and an apparatus or means specifically designed for carrying out the said process.
Otherwise, unity of invention might not be present. See 37 CFR 1.475 (c).
Restriction is required under 35 U.S.C. 121 and 372.
This application contains the following inventions or groups of inventions which are not so linked as to form a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1.
In accordance with 37 CFR 1.499, applicant is required, in reply to this action, to elect a single invention to which the claims must be restricted.
Group I, claim(s) 1-16, drawn to a method.
Group II, claim(s) 17-20, drawn to an apparatus.
The groups of inventions listed above do not relate to a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1 because, under PCT Rule 13.2, they lack the same or corresponding special technical features for the following reasons:
Group I and II lack unity of invention because even though the inventions of these groups require the technical feature of a method as described in claim 1, this technical feature is not a special technical feature as it does not make a contribution over the prior art in view of Dezelah et al. USPGPub 2022/0181148A1 hereinafter DEZELAH.
During a telephone conversation with Matt Hall on 9/25/26 a provisional election was made with traverse to prosecute the invention of Group I, claims 1-16. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 17-20 withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
The examiner has required restriction between product or apparatus claims and process claims. Where applicant elects claims directed to the product/apparatus, and all product/apparatus claims are subsequently found allowable, withdrawn process claims that include all the limitations of the allowable product/apparatus claims should be considered for rejoinder. All claims directed to a nonelected process invention must include all the limitations of an allowable product/apparatus claim for that process invention to be rejoined.
In the event of rejoinder, the requirement for restriction between the product/apparatus claims and the rejoined process claims will be withdrawn, and the rejoined process claims will be fully examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. Thus, to be allowable, the rejoined claims must meet all criteria for patentability including the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 101, 102, 103 and 112. Until all claims to the elected product/apparatus are found allowable, an otherwise proper restriction requirement between product/apparatus claims and process claims may be maintained. Withdrawn process claims that are not commensurate in scope with an allowable product/apparatus claim will not be rejoined. See MPEP § 821.04. Additionally, in order for rejoinder to occur, applicant is advised that the process claims should be amended during prosecution to require the limitations of the product/apparatus claims. Failure to do so may result in no rejoinder. Further, note that the prohibition against double patenting rejections of 35 U.S.C. 121 does not apply where the restriction requirement is withdrawn by the examiner before the patent issues. See MPEP § 804.01.
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) 1-6, 9, 10-11, and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dezelah et al. US PGPub 2022/0181148A1 hereinafter DEZELAH.
As or claim 1, DEZELAH teaches “The current disclosure relates to a vapor deposition assembly for depositing silicon nitride on a substrate by a plasma enhanced cyclic deposition process,” (abstract, liens 1-3) and “As used herein, the term "cyclic deposition" may refer to the sequential introduction of a silicon precursor and a reactive species (reactants) into a reaction chamber to deposit SiN on a substrate, and includes processing techniques such as atomic layer deposition (ALD) and cyclic chemical vapor deposition (CVD)” (paragraph 26, lines 1-6), i.e. A method (300) for forming a silicon nitride film on a substrate in a processing chamber by chemical vapor deposition.
DEZELAH further teaches “In some embodiments, all deposition and/or optional surface treatment processes are performed in the same reaction chamber, so that all the steps can continuously be conducted without exposing the substrate 312 to air or other oxygen-containing atmosphere. In some embodiments, a remote plasma unit can be used for exciting a nitrogen-containing gas” (paragraph 89, lines 13-19), “wherein the vapor deposition assembly comprises a remote
plasma generator” (claim 3), and “wherein the reactive species comprises at least one of N*, NH* and NH2* radicals” (claim 6), i.e. introducing (302) a nitrogen-containing precursor into a remote plasma formed in a remote plasma chamber (612) of a processing tool (600); forming (308) radical nitrogen species in the remote plasma.
DEZELAH teaches “providing a vapor-phase silicon precursor according to the formula SiH3X, wherein X is iodine or bromine, into the reaction chamber” (claim 5, lines 7-9), i.e. flowing (312) an oxygen-free silicon-containing precursor into a processing chamber of the processing tool.
DEZELAH further teaches “For example, the silicon precursor and the reactive species may be provided simultaneously in pulses that partially or completely overlap” (paragraph 26, lines 19-22), i.e. while flowing the oxygen-free silicon-containing precursor, introducing (316) the radical
nitrogen species from the remote plasma chamber into the processing chamber.
DEZELAH teaches “providing the silicon precursor in the reaction chamber; and providing nitrogen-containing plasma in the reaction chamber to deposit silicon nitride on the substrate” (claim 1, lines 20-24), i.e. reacting (316) the oxygen-free silicon-containing precursor with the radical nitrogen species to form the silicon nitride film on the substrate.
As for claim 2, DEZELAH teaches “SiN according to the current disclosure may be deposited conformally on structures on a substrate” (paragraph 24, lines 2-4), i.e. wherein forming the silicon nitride film comprises forming a conformal silicon nitride film.
As for claim 3, Examiner notes that the language of silane-based precursor is very broad and encompasses not just silanes by any molecule with a silane as a part of the structure or as a reactant used to produce that molecule.
With that in mind, DEZELAH teaches “a silicon precursor source constructed and arranged to provide a silicon precursor comprising SiH3X, wherein X is Br or I, into the reaction chamber” (claim 1, lines 6-8), i.e. wherein flowing the oxygen-free silicon-containing precursor comprises flowing a silane-based precursor.
As for claim 4, DEZELAH teaches “In some embodiments, substrate comprises amorphous carbon” (paragraph 21, lines 12-13) and “In some embodiments, SiN is deposited on a carbon hardmask mandrel used in multiple patterning” (paragraph 22, lines 2-4), i.e. wherein forming the silicon nitride film comprises forming the silicon nitride film on one or more of an amorphous silicon mandrel or an amorphous carbon mandrel.
As for claim 5, DEZELAH teaches “FIG. 2 depicts an exemplary structure comprising a SiN layer according to the current disclosure in a schematic manner. Portion of a device or structure 200 includes a substrate 202 and a SiN layer 204” (paragraph 82, lines 1-4) and Figure 2 shows a SiN 204 layer is formed in the gaps, i.e. wherein forming the silicon nitride film comprises forming the silicon nitride film in one or more gaps on the substrate.
As for claim 6, DEZELAH teaches “The cyclic process for depositing SiN may be an ALD process. The cyclic process for depositing SiN may be a CVD process. The cyclic process for depositing SiN may be hybrid process” (paragraph 26, lines 6-9), i.e. further comprising performing atomic layer deposition to deposit additional silicon nitride onto the silicon nitride film.
As for claim 9, DEZELAH teaches “wherein the nitrogen-containing plasma is generated from a nitrogen-containing gas comprising one or more of the following: NH3, N2H4, N2/H2 mixture, N2” (claim 9), i.e. wherein introducing the nitrogen-containing precursor into the remote plasma comprises introducing one or more of nitrogen, nitrogen/hydrogen, ammonia, hydrazine, or an amine into the remote plasma.
As for claim 10, DEZELAH teaches “The current disclosure relates to a vapor deposition assembly for depositing silicon nitride on a substrate by a plasma enhanced cyclic deposition process,” (abstract, liens 1-3), “The reaction chamber may be part of a cluster tool in which different processes are performed to form an integrated circuit” (paragraph 25, lines 5-7) and “As used herein, the term "cyclic deposition" may refer to the sequential introduction of a silicon precursor and a reactive species (reactants) into a reaction chamber to deposit SiN on a substrate, and includes processing techniques such as atomic layer deposition (ALD) and cyclic chemical vapor deposition (CVD)” (paragraph 26, lines 1-6), i.e. A method of forming a silicon nitride film on a substrate in a processing chamber of a chemical vapor deposition (CVD) tool (600).
DEZELAH further teaches “In some embodiments, all deposition and/or optional surface treatment processes are performed in the same reaction chamber, so that all the steps can continuously be conducted without exposing the substrate 312 to air or other oxygen-containing atmosphere. In some embodiments, a remote plasma unit can be used for exciting a nitrogen-containing gas” (paragraph 89, lines 13-19), “wherein the vapor deposition assembly comprises a remote
plasma generator” (claim 3), and “wherein the reactive species comprises at least one of N*, NH* and NH2* radicals” (claim 6), i.e. introducing (302) a nitrogen-containing precursor into a remote plasma formed in a remote plasma chamber (612) of the CVD tool; forming (308) radical nitrogen species in the remote plasma.
DEZELAH teaches “providing a vapor-phase silicon precursor according to the formula SiH3X, wherein X is iodine or bromine, into the reaction chamber” (claim 5, lines 7-9), i.e. introducing (312) an oxygen-free silicon-containing precursor into the processing chamber of the CVD tool.
DEZELAH further teaches “For example, the silicon precursor and the reactive species may be provided simultaneously in pulses that partially or completely overlap” (paragraph 26, lines 19-22) and
“providing the silicon precursor in the reaction chamber; and providing nitrogen-containing plasma in the reaction chamber to deposit silicon nitride on the substrate” (claim 1, lines 20-24), i.e. introducing (316) the radical nitrogen species from the remote plasma chamber into the processing chamber; reacting (316) the oxygen-free silicon-containing precursor with the radical nitrogen species to form the silicon nitride film on the substrate.
DEZELAH teaches “The cyclic process for depositing SiN may be an ALD process. The cyclic process for depositing SiN may be a CVD process. The cyclic process for depositing SiN may be hybrid process” (paragraph 26, lines 6-9), i.e. performing (330) atomic layer deposition to form one or more additional layers of silicon nitride on the silicon nitride film.
As for claim 11, DEZELAH teaches “In some embodiments, SiN is deposited on a carbon hardmask mandrel used in multiple patterning” (paragraph 22, lines 2-4), i.e. wherein forming the silicon nitride film on the substrate comprises forming the silicon nitride film on one or more mandrels.
As for claim 13, DEZELAH teaches “In some embodiments, substrate comprises amorphous carbon” (paragraph 21, lines 12-13) and “In some embodiments, SiN is deposited on a carbon hardmask mandrel used in multiple patterning” (paragraph 22, lines 2-4), i.e. wherein the one or more mandrels comprise amorphous silicon.
As for claim 14, DEZELAH teaches “FIG. 2 depicts an exemplary structure comprising a SiN layer according to the current disclosure in a schematic manner. Portion of a device or structure 200 includes a substrate 202 and a SiN layer 204” (paragraph 82, lines 1-4) and Figure 2 shows a SiN 204 layer is formed in the gaps, i.e. wherein forming the silicon nitride film on the substrate comprises forming the silicon nitride film in one or more gaps on the substrate.
As for claim 15, Examiner notes that the language of silane-based precursor is very broad and encompasses not just silanes by any molecule with a silane as a part of the structure or as a reactant used to produce that molecule.
With that in mind, DEZELAH teaches “a silicon precursor source constructed and arranged to provide a silicon precursor comprising SiH3X, wherein X is Br or I, into the reaction chamber” (claim 1, lines 6-8), i.e. wherein introducing the oxygen-free silicon-containing precursor into the processing chamber comprises introducing a silane-based precursor into the processing chamber.
As for claim 16, DEZELAH teaches “wherein the nitrogen-containing plasma is generated from a nitrogen-containing gas comprising one or more of the following: NH3, N2H4, N2/H2 mixture, N2” (claim 9), i.e. wherein introducing the nitrogen-containing precursor into the remote plasma comprises introducing one or more of nitrogen, nitrogen/hydrogen, ammonia, hydrazine, or an amine into the remote plasma.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dezelah et al. US PGPub 2022/0181148A1 hereinafter DEZELAH.
As for claim 7, DEZELAH teaches “In some embodiments, nitrogen-containing plasma may be generated by applying RF power of from about 10 W to about 2000 W” (paragraph 54, lines 1-3), i.e. a range that overlaps with wherein forming the radical nitrogen species comprises using a radiofrequency power within a range of 300 to 2000 watts to form the remote plasma. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d, 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP 2144.05.
As for claim 8, DEZELAH teaches “According to some embodiments of the present disclosure, a pressure in the reaction chamber during processing is maintained at from about 0.01 Torr to about 50 Torr” (paragraph 60, lines 1-4), i.e. a range that overlaps with further comprising controlling a pressure of the processing chamber to within a range of 2 to 8 torr while forming the silicon nitride film. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d, 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP 2144.05.
Claim(s) 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dezelah et al. US PGPub 2022/0181148A1 hereinafter DEZELAH as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Chen et al. US Patent Number 10,340,180 hereinafter CHEN.
As for claim 12, DEZELAH teaches “In some embodiments, SiN is deposited on a carbon hardmask mandrel used in multiple patterning” (paragraph 22, lines 2-4).
DEZELAH is silent on the mandrels comprising amorphous silicon.
CHEN teaches “The present disclosure relates to semiconductor structures and, more particularly, to merged mandrel lines and methods of manufacture” (abstract, lines 1-3).
CHEN further teaches “In embodiments, the hardmask stack 18 will protect the underlying dielectric material 16 during the etching process, resulting in the mandrel features including, e.g., merged mandrel lines 20a, 20b, 20c of the amorphous material 20.” (column 4, lines 12-16), and “A mandrel material, e.g., amorphous silicon, 20 is formed on the hardmask stack 18. A patterned hardmask 22 is formed on the mandrel material, e.g., to provide mandrel patterns or lines in subsequent etching processes. The patterned hardmask 22 can be formed by conventional lithography and etching processes, e.g., 30 reactive ion etching (RIE).” (column 3, lines 25-31), i.e. wherein the one or more mandrels comprise amorphous silicon.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein the one or more mandrels comprise amorphous silicon in the process of DEZELAH because CHEN teaches that such amorphous silicon hardmask were useful for patterning structures on mandrels.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISTEN A DAGENAIS whose telephone number is (571)270-1114. The examiner can normally be reached 8-12 and 1-5.
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, Dah Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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.
/KRISTEN A DAGENAIS/Examiner, Art Unit 1717
