www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and TrademarkOffice
`Address; COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`17/114,679
`
`12/08/2020
`
`Atsushi HARIKAT
`
`ISHII-63655
`
`5029
`
`PEARNE & GORDON LLP
`1801 EAST 9TH STREET
`SUITE 1200
`
`CLEVELAND, OH 44114-3108
`
`AHMED, SHAMIM
`
`1713
`
`10/07/2021
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`
`patdocket@ pearne.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-6 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) ___ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`C} Claim(s)
`is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected.
`S)
`) © Claim(s)____is/are objected to.
`Cj) Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`S)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) )
`
`Application Papers
`10)() The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11) The drawing(s) filed on 12/08/2020 is/are: a)[¥) accepted or b)(. objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`_—_c)L) None ofthe:
`b)L) Some**
`a)¥) All
`1.4) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.2) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.2.) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) (J Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`4)
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20210923
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`17/114,679
`HARIKAI etal.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF) StatusExaminer
`SHAMIM AHMED
`1713
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEofthis communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing
`date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133}.
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s) filed on 12/8/2020.
`C} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)L) This action is FINAL. 2b)¥)This action is non-final.
`3)02 An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4\0) Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/114,679
`Art Unit: 1713
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`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
`
`2.
`
`In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35
`
`U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any
`
`correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new groundof
`
`rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be
`
`the same under either status.
`
`3.
`
`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 madein this Office action:
`
`A person shall be entitled to a patent unless —
`
`(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, orin 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 patentissued under section 151, orinan
`application for patent published or deemed published under s ection 122(b), in which the
`patentor application, as the case maybe, namesanotherinventor and waseffectively filed
`before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
`
`4.
`
`Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being
`
`anticipated by Tohet al (US 2017/0117118).
`
`Toh etal disclose a process of plasma etching a material layer 404 on a
`
`substrate to form a trench 416 having a bottom exposing an oxidefilm, the substrate
`
`402 may comprisessilicon oxide [0041]; the material layer 404 may be a dielectric layer,
`
`for example, selected from a group consisting of an oxide layer [0042].
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/114,679
`Art Unit: 1713
`
`Page 3
`
`Toh et al disclose that the oxide etching or removal process comprises exposing
`
`the substrate with a plasma,including a plurality of cycles and each cycle includes an
`
`oxide etching step (blocks 310,316) [0045]-[0051]; and at block 320, generating inert
`
`gas plasma to facilitate removal of silicon oxide at the bottom of the trench and atthis
`
`time, the inert gas plasma treatment mayfacilitate a higher bottom clean efficiency
`
`includes physical bombardmentof inert gas ions against reacted etchant byproducts so
`
`as to remove them, reducing top trench overhang and allowing fresh etchant to enter
`
`the bottom of a trench (see the block diagram in Fig 3; [(0054]) and aforesaid inert gas
`
`plasma treatment easily reads on the claimed “cleaning step of removing attached
`
`matter on inner walls of the trenches, after the oxide film etching step”.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`5.
`
`In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35
`
`U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any
`
`correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new groundof
`
`rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be
`
`the same under either status.
`
`6.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis forall
`
`obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`A patent for a claimed invention maynotbe obtained, notwithstanding thatthe claimed
`invention is not identicallydisclosed as set forth insection 102, if the differences between the
`claimed invention and the prior artare such thatthe claimed invention as a whole would have
`been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having
`ordinaryskill inthe art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentabilityshall notbe
`negated by the mannerin whichthe invention was made.
`
`7.
`
`This application currently namesjoint inventors.
`
`In considering patentability of the
`
`claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/114,679
`Art Unit: 1713
`
`Page 4
`
`commonly ownedasof 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
`
`ownedasof 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.
`
`8.
`
`Claims 1-2 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Yoshiaki (JP-2002-190538; provided with the IDS) in view of Tohet al (US
`
`2017/0117118).
`
`Yoshiaki disclose a process of dicing a substrate including a silicon oxide film by
`
`plasma etching on a silicon substrate; forming a plurality of element separation regions
`
`madeofsilicon oxide film on a silicon substrate; as shown in Figure 5E, the silicon oxide
`
`film 503 is etched to form a trench having sidewalls 504; and as shown in figure 6, the
`
`silicon oxide film 501 for element separation is etched so that the wall surface hasin
`
`inclination (taper angle) [0002],[0004]; and during etching the silicon oxide film carbon-
`
`containing gas may be used as reactive gas to generate plasma [0005].
`
`Unlike the instant invention, Yoshiaki fails to disclose the silicon oxide etching is
`
`performed with a plurality of cycles of etching the oxide film and a cleaning step to
`
`remove attached matter on inner walls of the trench.
`
`However, Toh et al disclose that the oxide etching or removal process comprises
`
`exposing the substrate with a plasma,including a plurality of cycles and each cycle
`
`includes an oxide etching step (blocks 310,316) [0045]-[0051]; and at block 320,
`
`generating inert gas plasma to facilitate removal of silicon oxide at the bottom of the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/114,679
`Art Unit: 1713
`
`Page 5
`
`trench and atthis time, the inert gas plasma treatment mayfacilitate a higher bottom
`
`clean efficiency includes physical bombardment of inert gas ions against reacted
`
`etchant byproducts so as to remove them, reducing top trench overhang and allowing
`
`fresh etchant to enter the bottom of a trench (see the block diagram in Fig 3; [0054])
`
`and aforesaid inert gas plasma treatment easily reads on the claimed “cleaning step of
`
`removing attached matter on inner walls of the trenches, after the oxide film etching
`
`step”.
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill
`
`in the art before the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ Tohet al’s teaching of etching the
`
`oxide film with cyclic steps of etching and cleaning into Yoshiaki’s teaching for reducing
`
`top trench overhang and allowing fresh etchant to enter the bottom of a trench as taught
`
`by Toh etal.
`
`With regards to claims 2 and 6, Toh et al disclose above that forming the trench
`
`(416) by etching a silicon layer until the silicon oxide film is exposed (see Figure 4G).
`
`9.
`
`Claim 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Yoshiaki (JP-2002-190538; provided with the IDS) in view of Tohet al (US
`
`2017/0117118) as applied to claims 1-2 above, and further in view of Donohueetal
`
`(US 6071822).
`
`Modified Yoshiaki discloses above except the silicon removal process includes a
`
`plurality of cycles, each cycle includes a silicon etching step of plasma etching and a
`
`protective film deposition step of exposing trenches formed by the silicon etching step to
`
`a plasma, to deposit a protective film on inner walls of the trenches.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/114,679
`Art Unit: 1713
`
`Page 6
`
`However, Donohueetal disclose a plasma etching process ofsilicon layer by
`
`sequential (cyclic) process of etching and polymerizing are performed onasilicon
`
`substrate as aresult, deep structures (e.g., trenches) having vertical edges exhibiting
`
`little or no undercutting on silicon on insulator substrates are formed; and during the
`
`reactive ion etching of the clearing step, the side walls of the structures to be etched,
`
`remain protected by the polymer applied during the polymerization step (col.3, lines 18-
`
`40 and col.4, lines 45-61); The polymer applied to the etching edge in the
`
`polymerization step is partially re-stripped during the subsequent clearing phase which
`
`involves a reactive ion etching step; The clearing etch can be cyclic and repeated, that
`
`is, followed by a polymerizing deposition with further etching (col.12, lines 12-28); and
`
`aforesaid “polymerizing” step resemble as the claimed “protective film deposition step”.
`
`So, Donohueet al disclose that the silicon etching and polymerizing are cyclic and
`
`repeated (see, claim 3).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill
`
`in the art before the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ Donohue etal’s teaching of
`
`sequentially (cyclic) performing etching and polymerizing step into Modified Yoshiaki’s
`
`teaching for achieving a deep trench having vertical edges withalittle or no undercut as
`
`taught by Donohueetal.
`
`10.
`
`Claim 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Yoshiaki (JP-2002-190538; provided with the IDS) in view of Tohet al (US
`
`2017/0117118) as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of Donohueet
`
`al (US 6071822) and Kobayashi et al (US 2018/0261 464).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/114,679
`Art Unit: 1713
`
`Page 7
`
`Modified Yoshiaki disclose above except the oxide removal temperature is higher than
`
`the silicon removal process.
`
`However, Donohue etal disclose silicon etching is performed to form a trench
`
`with a temperature of 15 degree C (col.8, lines 45-47); and Kobayashi et al disclose
`
`oxide film is etched or removed ata 10 to 150 degree C [0112] and it appears oxide
`
`removal temperature is higher than the silicon removal temperature.
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill
`
`in the art before the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ Dohohue and Kobayashi et al’s
`
`teaching of higher temperature during oxide film removal into modified Yoshiaki’s
`
`teaching for efficiently etching or removing the oxide film as taught by Dohohue and
`
`Kobayashi etal.
`
`Additionally, without showing anycriticality of such, it would have been obvious
`
`to optimize a result-effective variable for predictable result.
`
`11.
`
`Claim 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Yoshiaki (JP-2002-190538; provided with the IDS) in view of Tohet al (US
`
`2017/0117118) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kobayashi etal (US
`
`2018/0261464).
`
`Modified Yoshiaki disclose above except the cleaning step is performed witha
`
`second plasma containing oxygen gas.
`
`However, Kobayashi etal disclose a processing substrate having insulating film
`
`of silicon oxide film, where removing the silicon-containing oxide film using a carbon-
`
`based gas [0049]-[0051]; and the method further includes removing a carbon-based
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/114,679
`Art Unit: 1713
`
`Page 8
`
`protective film remaining on a side wall of the pattern after the anisotropic plasma
`
`etching. The removing the residue may be performed to remove a reaction product
`
`generated by the chemical etching [0055] and the removing the carbon-based protective
`
`film may be performed by an O.sub.2 gas plasma processing [0056].
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill
`
`in the art before the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ Kobayashi et al’s teaching of
`
`removing carbon-based protective film from the side wall into modified Yoshiaki’s
`
`teaching for efficiently removing or cleaning the sidewall as taught by Kobayashi etal.
`
`Conclusion
`
`12.
`
`The prior art madeof record,listed in the PTO-892 and not relied upon is
`
`considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
`
`13.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to SHAMIM AHMED whose telephone numberis (571)272-
`
`1457. The examiner can normally be reached on M-TH (8-5:30pm).
`
`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:/Awww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's
`
`supervisor, Nadine G Norton can be reached on 571-272-1465. The fax phone number
`
`for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/114,679
`Art Unit: 1713
`
`Page 9
`
`Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the
`
`Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for
`
`published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
`
`Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only.
`
`For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-
`
`my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivateP air. Should you have questions on accessto the Private
`
`PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
`
`If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access
`
`to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-
`
`272-1000.
`
`SHAMIM AHMED
`Primary Examiner
`Art Unit 1713
`
`/SHAMIM AHMED/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713
`
`