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 § 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 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ria Someshwar et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2023/0015781, here after 781).
Claim 11 is rejected. 781 teaches a method comprising:
forming a molybdenum silicide layer (160) on bottom surface of a recessed feature on a substrate, the bottom surface comprising silicon [fig. 1E, 0051, 0054];
forming a molybdenum nitride layer (170) by forming a first molybdenum layer (since Mosi is form by ALD[0059], a few top layers are considered as first Mo layer) on the molybdenum silicide layer, and converting only a portion of the first molybdenum layer to a molybdenum nitride layer leaving a portion of the first molybdenum layer[0063]; and
depositing a second molybdenum layer (182) on or over the molybdenum nitride layer to fill the recessed feature [fig. 1F, 0064].
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 1-2, 5-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ria Someshwar et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2023/0015781, here after 781), further in view of Maurice E. Ewert et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2013/0270107, here after 107).
Claims 1 and 7 are rejected. 781 teaches a method comprising:
forming a molybdenum silicide layer (160) on a bottom surface of a
recessed feature on a substrate [0057, fig. 1E], the bottom surface comprising silicon
[fig. 1F]; and
depositing a first molybdenum layer (182) on or over the molybdenum silicide
layer to fill the recessed feature [0064]. 781 does not teach formation of molybdenum silicide by reacting a molybdenum containing precursor with the bottom surface at a temperature of 200 to 600°C. 781 teaches the first barrier layer (150) is optional[0055] therefore for structure without layer 150, silicide layer(160) is directly form on layer 140, therefore the MoSi forms on silicon layer(140)[0050] by ALD[0059], where in fact by contacting molybdenum precursor with silicon at temperature of 500-700C[0115] MoSi layer would obviously form. However, 781 does not teach molybdenum silicide formed by ALD at 200 to about 600°C [formation temperature of MoSi by contacting silicon and Mo precursor based on the specification 0008]. 107 teaches a method of filling a gap(aperture) in a substrate [abstract last 8 lines] comprising formation of metal(molybdenum) silicide by reaction between the silicon and deposited metal(molybdenum) at 150-500C [0054] (considering 500C) with ALD [0056]. Although 107 does not teach heating to 200 to 600°C, however teaches heating from 150-500[0054]. Overlapping ranges are prima facie evidence of obviousness. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have selected the portion of
[overlapping range] that corresponds to the claimed range. In re Malagari, 182 USPQ
549 (CCPA 1974). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the
art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of 781, and 701 when
heating is 200-500C, because one having ordinary skill in the art to have selected the
portion of [overlapping range] that corresponds to the claimed range on absence of
criticality. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of 781 and form metal silicide as by reacting Mo-containing precursor and bottom surface, because MoSi forms by contacting Mo precursor with silicon at 500C.
Claim 2 is rejected as 781 further teaches exposing the molybdenum silicide
layer to a reducing agent comprising silane, or disilane thereof prior to depositing the
first molybdenum layer [0061, 0059] (ALD deposition MoSi repeating exposing MoSi
layer to reducing agent).
Claim 5 is rejected. 781 teaches exposing the molybdenum silicide layer to
nitrogen radicals or nitrogen-containing radicals, wherein the nitrogen radicals or
nitrogen-containing radicals comprise nitrogen plasma [0063 last 8 lines].
Claim 6 is rejected. 781 teaches exposing the molybdenum silicide layer to a
reducing agent comprising silane, or disilane prior to exposing the molybdenum silicide
layer to nitrogen radicals or nitrogen-containing radicals [0061-0063, 0059] (ALD
deposition of MoSi and repeating exposing MoSi layer to reducing agent, and then
nitridation).
Claim 8 is rejected. 781 teaches the first molybdenum layer is formed by flowing
a molybdenum halide precursor [0060].
Claim 9 is rejected. 781 teaches the molybdenum silicide layer has a thickness of
about 0.3 to about 10 nm (4 nm) [0057].
Claim 10 is rejected. 781 teaches the molybdenum silicide layer has a thickness
of 40 A (4 nm).
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ria
Someshwar et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2023/0015781, here after 781), and Maurice E. Ewert et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2013/0270107, here after 107), further in view of Yun-Yen Jack Yang et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2001/0002326, here after
326).
Claim 3 is rejected. 781 teaches prior to depositing the first molybdenum layer
(182), forming a molybdenum nitride layer by exposing molybdenum silicide layer to
nitrogen plasma (nitrogen radicals) [0063], but does not teach forming a
(second)molybdenum layer on the molybdenum silicide layer; and
exposing the second molybdenum layer to nitrogen radicals or nitrogen-containing
radicals (nitrogen plasma). 326 teaches forming a metal (Mo) silicide layer following by
nitridization plasma to make metal(molybdenum) nitride, or forming metal nitride by
forming a metal layer and then nitridization with plasma [0031-0032]. Therefore, it would
have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was
made to have a method of 781 where the molybdenum nitride layer is made by
depositing a metal layer and then exposing it to nitridization plasma (nitrogen containing
radiclas), because it is suitable way for making molybdenum nitride.
Claim 4 is rejected for the same reason claim 3 is rejected. By exposing the
metal (Mo) layer to nitridization plasma, a portion of the second molybdenum is
converted to a molybdenum nitride layer when exposed to the nitrogen-containing
radicals.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/29/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues reaction is between silicon and deposited metal. The examiner explained the rejection more to make it clear that 781 teaches deposition of metal is via ALD, therefore the MoSi forms on silicon layer by ALD [0059], where in fact by contacting molybdenum precursor with silicon at temperature of 500-700C [0115] MoSi layer would obviously form. 107 teaches formation of metal(molybdenum) silicide by reaction between the silicon and deposited metal(molybdenum) at 150-500C [0054] (considering 500C) with ALD [0056]. Claim 11 is rejected as claim can read on molybdenum silicide and not pure elemental molybdenum.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 TABASSOM TADAYYON ESLAMI whose telephone number is (571)270-1885. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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 5712725166. 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.
/TABASSOM TADAYYON ESLAMI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Prosecution Insights