AMENDMENTS TO THE CLAIMS:
`
`This listing of claims will replace all prior versions and listings of claims in the
`
`application:
`
`1. (Cancelled)
`
`2. (Previously presented): The method of Claim 21, further including holding the temperature
`
`of the substrate substantially constant.
`
`3. (Previously presented): The method of Claim 21, wherein applying pulsed DC power through
`
`the filter includes supplying up to about 10 kW of power at a frequency of between about 40 kHz
`
`and about 350 kHz and a reverse time pulse between about 1.3 and 5 µs.
`
`4. (Previously presented): The method of Claim 21, wherein adjusting an RF bias power to the
`
`substrate includes supplying up to 1000 W of RF power to the substrate.
`
`5. (Canceled).
`
`6. (Previously presented): The method of claim 4, wherein the RF bias power is zero.
`
`7. (Currently amended): The method of Claim 21, wherein the film is an HJ3J3er elac:lc:liHg layer of
`
`a wa11egHiae straetHre anc:l the RF hias power is optimized to provide planarization.
`
`8. (Previously presented): The method of Claim 21, wherein a process gas of the process gas
`
`flow includes a mixture of Oxygen and Argon.
`
`9. (Previously presented): The method of Claim 8, wherein the mixture is adjusted to adjust the
`
`index of refraction of the film.
`
`10. (Previously presented): The method of Claim 8, wherein the mixture further includes
`
`nitrogen.
`
`11. (Previously presented):· The method of Claim 21, wherein applying pulsed DC power to the
`
`target includes adjusting pulsed DC power to a target which has an area larger than that of the
`
`substrate.
`
`-2-
`
`Page 1296 of 1542
`
`APPLIED MATERIALS EXHIBIT 1052 (Part 4 of 4)
`
`

`

`12. (Previously presented): The method of Claim 21, further including uniformly sweeping the
`
`target with a magnetic field.
`
`13. (Previously Presented): The method of Claim 12, wherein uniformly sweeping the target
`
`with a magnetic field includes sweeping a magnet in one direction across the target where the
`
`magnet extends beyond the target in the opposite direction.
`
`14.-20. (Cancelled).
`
`21. (Currently amended): A method of depositing [[a]] an oxide film on a substrate, comprising:
`
`conditioning a target;
`
`preparing the substrate;
`
`adjusting an RF bias power to the substrate;
`
`setting a process gas flow; and
`
`applying pulsed DC power to the target through a filter such that the target voltage
`
`oscillates between positive and negative voltages to create a plasma and deposit the oxide film,
`
`wherein conditioning the target includes sputtering with the target in a metallic mode to
`
`remove the surface of the target and sputtering with the target in poisonous mode to prepare the
`
`surface, and
`
`wherein the filter is a band rejection filter at a frequency of the bias power.
`
`22. (Previously Presented): The method of Claim 21, wherein setting the process gas flow
`
`includes adjusting constituents in order to adjust the index of refraction of the film.
`
`23. (Previously Presented): The method of Claim 21, wherein applying pulsed DC power
`
`includes setting the frequency in order to adjust the index of refraction of the film.
`
`24. (Previously Presented): The method of Claim 21, further including adjusting a temperature
`
`of the substrate in order to adjust the index of refraction of the film.
`
`25.-39. (Canceled).
`
`40. (Previously presented): The method of cl~im 21, wherein the band rejection filter is a
`
`-3-
`
`Page 1297 of 1542
`
`

`

`narrow band-pass filter.
`
`41. (Previously presented): The method of claim 21, wherein a bandwidth of the band rejection
`
`filter is about 100 kHz.
`
`42. (Previously presented): The method of claim 21, wherein the frequency of the RF bias is
`
`about 2 MHz.
`
`43. (Currently amended): A method of depositing [[a]] an oxide film on a substrate, comprising:
`
`preparing the substrate;
`
`adjusting an RF bias power to the substrate;
`
`setting a process gas flow; and
`
`applying pulsed DC power to a target through a band rejection filter at a frequency of the
`
`bias power such that the target voltage oscillates between positive and negative voltages and an
`
`oxide film is deposited on the substrate.
`
`44. (Previously presented): The method of claim 43, wherein a bandwidth of the band rejection
`
`filter is about 100 kHz.
`
`45. (Previously presented): The method of claim 43, wherein the frequency of the RF bias is
`
`about 2 MHz.
`
`46. (Previously presented): The method of Claim 43, wherein applying pulsed DC power
`
`includes supplying up to about 10 kW of power at a frequency of between about 40 kHz and
`about 350 kHz and a reverse time pulse between about 1.3 and 5 µs.
`
`47. (Previously presented): The method of Claim 43, further including holding the temperature
`
`of the substrate substantially constant.
`
`48. (Previously presented): The method of Claim 43, wherein adjusting an RF bias power to the
`
`substrate includes supplying up to 1000 W of RF power to the substrate.
`
`49. (Previously presented): The method of Claim 43, further including uniformly sweeping the
`
`target with a magnetic field.
`
`-4-
`
`Page 1298 of 1542
`
`

`

`50. (Previously presented): The method of Claim 49, wherein uniformly sweeping the target
`
`with a magnetic field includes sweeping a magnet in one direction across the target where the
`
`magnet extends beyond the target in the opposite direction.
`
`51. (New): A method of depositing an oxide film on a substrate, comprising:
`
`providing a process gas between the substrate and a target;
`
`applying an RF bias power to the substrate;
`
`applying pulsed DC power to the target such that the target voltage oscillates between
`
`positive and negative voltages; and
`
`filtering the pulsed DC power through a narrow band rejection filter at a frequency of the
`
`bias power,
`
`wherein the oxide film is deposited on the substrate.
`
`52. (New): The method of claim 51, wherein the process gas includes one or more gasses
`
`chosen from the group consisting of Ar, N2, 02, C2F6, CO2, CO, NH3, NO, and halide containing
`
`gasses.
`
`53. (New): The method of claim 51, wherein the target is a metallic target.
`
`54. (New): The method of claim 51, wherein the target is an intermetllic target.
`
`55. (New). The method of claim 51, further including sweeping the target with a magnetic field.
`
`56. (New): The method of claim 51, wherein the pulsed DC power is supplied with a reverse
`
`time pulse between about 1.3 and 5 µs.
`
`57. (New): The method of Claim 51, wherein applying an RF bias power to the substrate
`
`includes supplying up to 1000 W of RF power to the substrate.
`
`58. (New) The method of claims 21, wherein applying pulsed DC power through the filter
`
`includes supplying pulsed DC power at a pulse frequency of between about 40 kHz and about
`
`350 kHz.
`
`59. (New) The method of claim 43, wherein applying pulsed DC power through the filter
`
`includes supplying pulsed DC power at a pulse frequency of between about 40 kHz and about
`
`-5-
`
`Page 1299 of 1542
`
`

`

`350 kHz.
`
`60. (New) The method of claim 51, wherein applying pulsed DC power through the filter
`
`includes supplying pulsed DC power at a pulse frequency of between about 40 kHz and about
`
`350 kHz.
`
`-6-
`
`Page 1300 of 1542
`
`

`

`REMARKS
`
`Claims 2-4, 6-14, and 21-50 are pending in this application. The Examiner has allowed
`
`claim 14 and rejected claims 2-4, 6-13, and 21-50. Applicants have canceled claim 14, amended
`
`claims 21 and 43, and added new claims 51-60.
`
`Examiner's Interview
`
`Applicants wish to thank the Examiner for spending her time in an interview on January
`
`18, 2007. In attendance at the Interview were Examiner Michelle Estrada, Applicant's counsel,
`
`Gary J. Edwards, and Inventors R. Ernest Demaray and Hongmei Zhang. Applicants
`
`substantially agree with the Examiner's Summary of the Interview mailed on January 23, 2007,
`
`and provide further discussion of the material discussed below.
`
`During the interview, the inventors described to the Examiner the development of the
`
`invention, including the development of applicant's pulsed-DC processing technology, and the
`
`teachings of the cited references. In particular, the Smolanoff reference was discussed with
`
`respect to independent claims 21 and 43. Applicants discussed amending the claims to further
`
`clarify the distinctions between the claimed invention and the teachings of Smolanoff and other
`
`cited art. Those amendments are reflected in the amended claims above and in the newly added
`
`claims. The distinctions between the claimed invention and the cited prior art is further
`
`discussed below.
`
`As pointed out to the Examiner during the interview, and as further discussed in the
`
`specification (see, e.g., Par. [0049]), the historical difficulty in deposition of insulating oxide
`
`layers is the formation of insulating layers on the target, which build up charges with the ultimate
`
`result of unwanted arcing. The arcing results in damaged power supplies and deposition of
`
`particulate matter, which degrades the properties of the resulting films deposited on the substrate.
`
`-7-
`
`Page 1301 of 1542
`
`

`

`Some embodiments of pulsed DC processing, as defined in the present application, can
`
`substantially eliminate this problem. As discussed, for example, in paragraph [0053] of
`
`Applicant's application, pulsed DC sputtering refers to a sputtering technique where the pulsed
`
`DC power supply oscillates between positive and negative potentials, driving the voltage of the
`
`target alternately to positive and negative potentials. Claims 21 and 43 of the present application
`
`have been amended to explicitly recite that "the target voltage oscillates between positive and
`
`negative voltages." New claim 51 also recites that "the target voltage oscillates between positive
`
`and negative voltages." The claims have also been amended to recite that the deposited films are
`
`oxide films. Applicants reserve the right to pursue allowable claims to the subject matter
`
`disclosed in the present application in continuation applications.
`
`In order to further improve the quality of the deposited film, Applicant's apply a
`
`combination of pulsed DC power to the target and RF bias to the substrate. As is discussed, for
`
`example, in paragraph [0057] of the specification, application of RF bias to the substrate results
`
`in a densification of the deposited film. In order to supply both a pulsed DC power to the target
`
`and an RF bias to the substrate, a narrow band rejection filter is coupled between the pulsed DC
`
`power supply and the target. The band rejection filter is arranged to reject RF power at the
`
`frequency of the RF bias to the substrate. Applicants discovered that the use of pulsed DC power
`
`to the target and RF bias to the substrate resulted in catastrophic failure of the pulsed DC power
`
`supply due to transmission of the RF power into the pulsed DC power supply. However, a
`
`conventional high or low pass filter blocks a portion of the pulsed DC frequency to the target and
`
`therefore the benefits of using pulsed DC power are lost. Applicants discovered that a narrow
`
`band rejection filter, an embodiment of which is described in the specification at paragraph
`
`[0056], both protects the DC power supply from the RF bias power and passes the pulsed DC
`
`-8-
`
`Page 1302 of 1542
`
`

`

`frequencies which form the square pulse of the pulsed DC power to the target so that the benefits
`
`of pulsed DC deposition with RF bias can be realized. The elimination of a narrow band of
`
`frequencies about a single frequency in a narrow band rejection filter has a small effect on the
`
`square shape of the pulsed DC pulse. However, elimination of either all higher frequencies or all
`
`lower frequencies from the single frequency effectively destroys the shape of the square pulse
`
`and eliminates control of both the magnitude and duration of the positive portion of the pulse.
`
`During prosecution of this application, several prior art publications have been raised,
`
`including Smolanoff (U.S. Patent 6,117,279) and Le (U.S. Publication No. 2003/0077914).
`
`Smolanoff was discussed during the Interview. Both publications are discussed below in
`
`particular. Neither of these references, either separately or in combination, teaches the
`
`combination of pulsed-DC deposition, where the target voltage oscillates between positive and
`
`negative voltages, and an RF bias. As a summary, Smolanoff teaches sputtering of a conducting
`
`or metallic layer and does not teach deposition of an "oxide layer," as is recited in each of claims
`
`21, 43, and 51 above. Additionally, Smolanoff does not teach "applying pulsed DC power to the
`
`target ... such that the target voltage oscillates between positive and negative voltages," as is
`
`recited in each of claims 21, 43 and 51. Further, although Smolanoff teaches a filter between a
`
`DC power supply and the target, Smolanoff does not teach a "narrow band rejection filter" as is
`
`recited in each of claims 21, 43, and 51.
`
`Le does not cure the defects in the teachings of Smolanoff. Le teaches "a method of
`
`depositing a titanium oxide layer on a substrate" utilizing pulsed DC voltage. (Le, Abstract)
`
`However, Le does not teach applying an RF bias to the substrate or a band rejection filter
`
`coupled between the pulsed DC power supply and the target. Further, one skilled in the art
`
`would not be motivated to combine the teachings of Smolanoff, which is directed toward
`
`-9-
`
`Page 1303 of 1542
`
`

`

`deposition of metallic layers, with the teachings of Le, which is directed toward deposition of a
`
`titanium oxide layer.
`
`As is further discussed below, claims 2-13, 21-24, and 40-60 are allowable over the cited
`
`prior art.
`
`Claim Reiections under 35 U.S.C. § 1031
`
`The Examiner has rejected claims 2-4, 6-13, and 21-50 over combinations of Fu and Le
`
`with Smolanoff. As discussed below, claims 2-4, 6-13, and 21-50, as amended, are allowable
`
`over the cited references.
`
`Claims 10-132 212 and 40-45
`
`The Examiner has rejected claims 10-13, 21, and 40-45 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
`
`being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 6,117,279 ("Smolanoff et al.") in view of U.S. Patent
`
`No. 6,306,265 ("Fu et al."). However, Smolanoff does not teach "applying pulsed DC power to
`
`the target ... such that the target voltage oscillates between positive and negative voltages," as is
`
`recited in claims 21 and 43. Additionally, Smolanoff does not teach "a band rejection filter at a
`
`frequency of the bias power," as is recited in claims 21 and 43. Further, Smolanoff does not
`
`teach deposition of "an oxide film," as is recited in claims 21 and 43.
`
`I. Smolanoff does not teach "applying pulsed DC power to the target ... such that the target
`voltage oscillates between positive and negative voltages," as is recited in claims 21 and 43.
`
`1 The Examiner has made multiple characterizations of the claims, the cited art, and application
`of legal principles to those characterizations. Applicants shall not be deemed to agree with or to
`acquiesce in the Examiner's statements by not specifically addressing these characterizations in
`this response.
`
`-10-
`
`Page 1304 of 1542
`
`

`

`Smolanoff teaches that "[t]he target power supply 21 is usually a source of constant or
`
`pulsed DC power and is connected between the cathode assembly 17 and some element such as
`
`the chamber wall 13 which is at ground potential and serves as the system anode." (Smolanoff,
`
`col. 5, lines 51-54). Additionally, Smolanoff teaches that "[p]ower from the steady or pulsed DC
`
`power supply 21 and/or RF generator 24 produces a negative potential on the target 16."
`
`(Smolanoff, col. 5, line 66, through col. 6, line 1).
`
`Applicants have explicitly defined pulsed DC power to refer to power that oscillates
`
`between positive and negative voltages. (See, application, par. [0053]). As described in the
`
`specification, the positive voltage period allows an insulating layer deposited on the target to
`
`discharge, resulting in an arc free deposition process. (See, application, par. [0053]). However,
`
`a second definition of "pulsed DC power" was also in use at the time, and the second definition
`
`is apparently the definition utilized in Smolanoff. In this second definition, which is also
`
`referred to as unipolar pulsed DC, the DC power supplied to the target is grounded on occasion,
`
`either periodically or when an impending discharge is detected. The DC power can be shunted
`
`to ground so that the voltage on the target was brought from a high negative voltage to near
`
`ground voltage until the arc condition was dissipated, while the negative voltage power supply
`
`was protected from the discharge. This process was also referred to as "pulsed DC power," but,
`
`in Smolanoff, the target remains at a negative voltage throughout the deposition.2
`
`2 Applicant has submitted three articles that explain various aspects of pulsed-de technology in
`the Information Disclosure Statement that accompanies this amendment: See, e.g., Richard A.
`Scholl, "Power Systems for Reactive Sputtering of Insulating Films," Advanced Energy
`Industries, Inc., While Paper, September, 2001, page 3, paragraph 3; See also, Richard A. Scholl,
`"Advanced Supplies for Pulsed Plasma Technologies: State-Of-The-Art and Outlook," Advanced
`Energy Industries, Inc., White Paper, 1999;; and A. Belkind, et al., "Pulsed-DC Reactive
`(continued ... )
`
`-11-
`
`Page 1305 of 1542
`
`

`

`The process of pulsed DC power as claimed in claims 21 and 43, where "the target
`
`voltage oscillates between positive and negative voltages," then, differs from the teachings of
`
`Smolanoff at least in that Smolanoff teaches that the target remains at a negative potential. Such
`
`pulses occur only, generally, when an impending discharge from the target is sensed and may not
`
`be periodic. Therefore, Smolanoff does not teach "that the target voltage oscillates between
`
`positive and negative voltages," as is recited in claims 21 and 43.
`
`II. Smolanoff does not teach "a band rejection filter at a frequency of the bias power." as is
`recited in claims 21 and 43.
`
`Smolanoff does not teach "a band rejection filter at a frequency of the bias power," as is
`
`recited in claims 21 and 43. Smolanoff teaches that "[t]he power supply 21 preferably is
`
`connected to the cathode assembly 17 through an RF filter 22." (Smolanoff, col. 5, lines 56-58).
`
`However, no further description of filter 22 is provided. Therefore, Smolanoff does not teach "a
`
`band rejection filter at a frequency of the bias power," as is recited in claims 21 and 43.
`
`The Examiner has commented that "using an specific type of filter is a matter of design
`
`choice depending on the quality of product needed, and it is obvious that the filter is going to
`
`work at certain frequencies." (OA, page 2). Additionally, the Examiner commented that "the
`
`limitation 'the filter is a band rejection filter at a frequency of the bias power' is a structural
`
`limitation in a method claim, so no matter what filter is used, as long as the same result is
`
`achieved." (OA, page 2). Applicants disagree.
`
`( ... continued)
`Sputtering of Dielectrics: Pulsing Parameter Effects," Society of Vacuum Coaters 43rd Annual
`Technical Conference Proceedings, Denver, CO, April 15-20, 2000.
`
`-12-
`
`Page 1306 of 1542
`
`

`

`Although it is true that "the filter is going to work at certain frequencies," as suggested by
`
`the Examiner, the recited "band rejection filter" works at the frequency of the RF bias supply and
`
`blocks only a narrow band of frequencies around the frequency of the RF bias supply. This
`
`allows the square wave pulse of the DC power, which is formed of all frequencies both higher
`
`and lower than the biased frequency, to be transmitted through the filter to the target. Otherwise,
`
`the pulse that would reach the target is distorted so that the benefits of the pulsed DC power are
`
`not realized. Therefore, utilization of a band rejection filter at the frequency of the bias power is
`
`neither taught nor obvious from the teachings of Smolanoff. Furthermore, use of a band
`
`rejection filter at the frequency of the bias power places a distinct limitation on the claim.
`
`Therefore, Smolanoff does not teach "applying pulsed DC power to the target through a
`
`filter ... wherein the filter is a band rejection filter at a frequency of the bias power," as is
`
`recited in claims 21, or "applying pulsed DC power to a target through a band rejection filter at a
`
`frequency of the bias power," as is recited in claim 43.
`
`III. Smolanoff teaches deposition of metallic films and does not teach "an oxide film." as is
`recited in claims 21 and 43.
`
`Smolanoff teaches "a sputter coating apparatus" that is generally directed to deposition of
`
`conducting films. In particular, Smolanoff "relates to sputter coating, and more particularly, to
`
`the Ionized Physical Vapor Deposition (IPVD) of coating material onto substrates." (Smolanoff,
`
`col. 1, lines 6-8). Smolanoff teaches that
`
`For some sputtering processes, such as those used for coating
`contacts at the bottoms of high aspect ratio holes and other features
`on the substrate 15 and for metallizing such holes by filling them
`with sputtered conductive material, it is highly preferred in VLSI
`semiconductor device manufacturing that the particles impinge
`onto the substrate 15 in a narrow angular distribution around the
`
`-13-
`
`Page 1307 of 1542
`
`

`

`normal to the substrate so that they can proceed directly into the
`features and onto the feature bottoms without striking or being
`shadowed by the feature sides.
`
`(Smolanoff, col. 6, lines 34-43).
`
`As stated in Smolanoff,
`
`The present invention is further predicated in part upon a principle
`that a substantial loss of positive ions from a secondary plasma and
`a resulting reduction in the ionization fraction of sputtered ions by
`the secondary plasma, are prevented when electrically conductive
`shields employed in ionized physical deposition processes on the
`periphery of the secondary plasma used for the ionization of the
`puttered material are prevented from developing a substantial
`negative DC potential. The invention is further predicated in part
`upon the concept that the existence of conductive shields or
`chamber walls bounding the secondary plasma, if prevented from
`developing a strongly negative DC potential or if kept far from the
`center of the chamber, will reduce the steering of positive ions
`from the secondary plasma into the walls or shields, and decrease
`the width of the plasma sheath. The invention is particularly
`predicated on the concept of providing these effects while
`maintaining an RF shield that will allow effective and efficient
`coupling of energy into the secondary plasma.
`
`Further, Smolanoff teaches that
`
`For sputter processing, the gas from the supply 40 is typically an
`inert gas such as argon. For reactive processes, additional gases,
`such as nitrogen, hydrogen, ammonia, oxygen or other gas, can be
`introduced through auxiliary flow controllers.
`
`(Smolanoff, col. 7, lines 23-26). Further, Smolanoff teaches that "[a] metal shield positioned
`
`inside of the window shields the window from the deposition of conductive sputtered material
`
`thereon which, if permitted to accumulate on the window, would isolate the chamber from the
`
`coil." (Smolanoff, col. 4, lines 19-22). Additionally, Smolanoff teaches that
`
`While the window 60 itself is not electrically conductive, it is
`susceptible to the accumulation of a coating of conductive material
`sputtered from the target 16 ....
`To prevent such buildup of conductive sputtered material
`on the window 60, a shield 70 is provided in the vacuum of the
`
`-14-
`
`Page 1308 of 1542
`
`

`

`chamber 12 between the space 11 and the window 60, in close
`proximity to the inside surface of the window 60.
`
`(Smolanoff, col. 7, line 61, -col. 8, line 9).
`
`As indicated in Smolanoff, and discussed above, the shield taught in Smolanoff can not
`
`be made insulating and must remain electrically conducting in order for the Smolanoff invention
`
`to function. Any deposition of insulating material, which would occur during deposition of an
`
`oxide material, would cause the invention taught in Smalanoff to become nonfunctional.
`
`Smolanoff, therefore, teaches away from deposition of dielectric materials such as oxide
`
`materials. Therefore Smolanoff teaches sputtering of conductive materials and does not teach
`
`deposition of oxide materials.
`
`IV. Fu does not cure the defects in the teachings of Smolanoff.
`
`As discussed above, Smolanoff teaches deposition of conducting films and does not teach
`
`"applying pulsed DC power to the target ... such that the target voltage oscillates between
`
`positive and negative voltages," as is recited in claims 21 and 43. Additionally, Smolonoff does
`
`not teach "a band rejection filter at a frequency of the bias power," as is recited in claims 21 and
`
`43. Fu does not cure the defects in the teachings of Smolonoff.
`
`Fu teaches "sputtering of materials." (Fu, col. 1, line 13). As shown in Figure 1, Fu
`
`teaches applying DC power to the target. (See, Fu, Fig. 1; col. 1, lines 30-32). However, Fu
`
`does not teach "applying pulsed DC power to the target ... such that the target voltage oscillates
`
`between positive and negative voltages," as is recited in claims 21 and 43. Therefore, Fu does
`
`not teach the combination of "applying pulsed DC power to the target through a filter ...
`
`wherein the filter is a band rejection filter at a frequency of the bias power," as is recited in claim
`
`21, or "applying pulsed DC power to a target through a band rejection filter at a frequency of the
`
`-15-
`
`Page 1309 of 1542
`
`

`

`bias power," as is recited in claim 43. Although Fu mentions that oxygen can be supplied to the
`
`reactor to produce oxides such as Ah03 (See, Fu, col. 1, lines 39-40), Fu concentrates on ionized
`
`metal deposition (See, e.g., Fu, title).
`
`Therefore, claims 21 and 43 are allowable over the combination of Fu and Smolanoff.
`
`Claims 10-13 and 40-42 depend from claim 21 and are allowable over the combination of Fu and
`
`Smolanoff for at least the same reasons as is claim 21. Claims 44-45 depend from claim 43 and
`
`are allowable over the combination of Fu and Smolanoff for at least the same reasons as is claim
`
`43.
`
`Claims 2-4, 5, and 22-24
`
`The Examiner has rejected claims 2-4, 6, and 22-24 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
`
`unpatentable over Smolanoff et al. in view of Fu et al. as applied to claims 8, 10-13, and 21, and
`
`further in view of the Examiner's comments.
`
`However, claims 2-4, 6, and 22-24 depend from claim 21, which is allowable over the
`
`combination of Fu and Smolanoff as discussed above. Therefore, claims 2-4, 6, and 22-24 are
`
`allowable over the combination of Fu and Smolanoff for at least the same reasons as is claim 21.
`
`The Examiner's comments regarding the prima facie obviousness of claiming different
`
`ranges are not appropriate with regard to claims 2-4, 6, and 22-24 because the recited ranges are
`
`directed to the process claimed, which as discussed above is allowable over the cited prior art.
`
`Therefore, the recited ranges in claims 2-4, 6, and 22-24 are not related to the ranges provided in
`
`the prior art, which is directed towards different processes.
`
`-16-
`
`Page 1310 of 1542
`
`

`

`Claims 7 and 9
`
`The Examiner has rejected claims 7 and 9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable
`
`over Smolanoff et al. in view of Fu et al. as applied to claims 8, 10-13, and 21, and further in
`
`view of U.S. Application No. 2003/0077914 ("Le et al.").
`
`As discussed above with respect to claim 21, the combination of Smolanoff and Fu does
`
`not teach "applying pulsed DC power to the target ... such that the target voltage oscillates
`
`between positive and negative voltages" and "a band rejection filter at a frequency of the bias
`
`power," as is recited in claims 21. Le does not cure the defects in the teachings of Smolanoff
`
`and Fu.
`
`Le teaches "a method of depositing a titanium oxide layer on a substrate" utilizing pulsed
`
`DC voltage. (Le, Abstract) However, Le does not teach applying an RF bias to the substrate or a
`
`band rejection filter coupled between the pulsed DC power supply and the target. Therefore, Le
`
`does not teach "applying pulsed DC power to the target ... such that the target voltage oscillates
`
`between positive and negative voltages" and "a band rejection filter at a frequency of the bias
`
`power," as is recited in claims 21.
`
`Further, one skilled in the art would not be motivated to combine the teachings of
`
`Smolanoff, which is directed toward deposition of metallic layers, with the teachings of Le,
`
`which is directed toward deposition of a titanium oxide layer. In fact, as discussed above,
`
`Smolanoff teaches away from the deposition of oxide layers because deposition of an oxide layer
`
`on the shield, which would occur during deposition of an oxide layer, would cause the Smolanoff
`
`invention to not function.
`
`-17-
`
`Page 1311 of 1542
`
`

`

`Therefore, claims 7 and 9, which depend from claim 21, are allowable for at least the
`
`same reason as is claim 21.
`
`New Claims
`
`Applicants have added new claims 51-60. Independent claim 51 includes the limitations
`
`of "an oxide film," "applying pulsed DC power to the target such that the target voltage
`
`oscillates between positive and negative voltages," and "filtering the pulsed DC power through a
`
`narrow band rejection filter at a frequency of the bias power," which are the limitations that were
`
`discussed with the Examiner during the Interview of January 18, 2007. Claim 51 includes
`
`limitations similar to those recited in claims 21 and 43 and discussed above. Therefore, claim 51
`
`is allowable over the cited prior art. Claims 52-57 and claim 60, which depend from claim 51,
`
`are therefore allowable over the cited prior art for at least the same reasons as is claim 51. Claim
`
`58 depends from claim 21 and is therefore allowable over the prior art for at least the same
`
`reasons as is claim 21. Claim 59 depends from claim 43 and is allowable over the prior art for at
`
`least the same reasons as is claim 43.
`
`Support for claims 51-60 can be found throughout the specification. Claim 51 includes
`
`limitations similar to claims 21 and 43. Claim 52 is disclosed, for example, in paragraph [0015)
`
`and paragraph [0073). Claims 53 and 54 are disclosed, for example, in paragraph [0062). Claim
`
`55 is similar to claim 12. Claim 56 includes limitations from claim 3. Claim 57 is similar to
`
`claim 4. Claims 58-60 include limitations from claim 3.
`
`-18-
`
`Page 1312 of 1542
`
`

`

`Conclusion
`
`In view of the foregoing remarks, Applicants submit that this claimed invention, as
`
`amended, is neither anticipated nor rendered obvious in view of the prior art references cited
`
`against this application. Applicants therefore request the entry of this Amendment, the
`
`Examiner's reconsideration and reexamination of the application, and the timely allowance of the
`
`pending claims.
`
`Please grant any extensions of time required to enter this response and charge any
`
`additional required fees to our deposit account 06-0916.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
`GARRETT & DUNNER, L.L.P.
`
`By:~~~L~a~~~
`
`Reg. No. 41,008
`
`Dated: February 6, 2007
`
`EXPRESS MAIL LABEL NO.
`EV 955594467 US
`
`-19-
`
`Page 1313 of 1542
`
`

`

`PATENT
`Customer No. 22,852
`Attorney Docket No. 9140.0016-00
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`)
`)
`) Group Art Unit: 2823
`)
`) Examiner: ESTRADA, Michelle
`)
`)
`)
`) Confirmation No.: 6938
`)
`
`In re Application of:
`
`ZHANG, Hongmei et al.
`
`Application No.: 10/101,863
`
`Filed: March 16, 2002
`
`For: BIASED PULSE DC REACTIVE
`SPUTTERING OF OXIDE FILMS
`
`MAIL STOP AMENDMENT
`Commissioner for Patents
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`Sir:
`
`TWELFTH SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
`UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 1.97(c)
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 1.56 and l.97(c), Applicant brings to the attention of the
`
`Examiner the documents on the attached listing. This Information Disclosure Statement is being
`
`filed after the events recited in Section l.97(b) but, to the undersigned's knowledge, before the
`
`mailing date of either a Final action, Quayle action, or a Notice of Allowance. Under the
`
`provisions of 37 C.F.R. § l .97(c), the Commissioner is hereby authorized to charge the fee of
`
`$180.00 as specified by Section l.17(p) to Deposit Account No. 06-0916.
`
`Copies of the listed foreign and non-patent literature documents are attached. Copies of
`
`the U.S. patents and patent publications are not enclosed.
`
`Applicant respectfully requests that the Examiner consider the listed documents and
`
`indicate that they