Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 1 of 97
`
`Application/Control Number:
`10/954,182
`Art Unit: 2823
`
`Page 3
`
`recognized suitability for an intended purpose has been recognized to be motivation to
`
`combine. See MPEP 2144.07.
`
`Re claim 87, providing RF bias power to a substrate (15) positioned opposite the
`
`target (Col. 5, lines 60-65). 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. Furthermore, 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, as explained above.
`
`Re claims 88 and 89, One of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to the
`
`recited bandwith and frequency through routine experimentation to achieve a desired
`
`device associated characteristics and rate of sputtering.
`
`In addition, the selection of the bandwith and frequency, its obvious because it is
`
`a matter of determining optimum process conditions by routine experimentation with a
`
`limited number of species of result effective variables. These claims are prima facie ·
`
`obvious without showing that the claimed ranges achieve unexpected results relative to
`
`the prior art range. In re Woodruff, 16 USPQ2d 1935, 1937 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See also
`
`In re Huang, 40 USPQ2d 1685, 1688 (Fed. Cir. 1996)(claimed ranges or a result
`
`effective variable, which do not overlap the prior art ranges, are unpatentable unless
`
`they produce a new and unexpected result which is different in kind and not merely in
`
`degree from the results of the prior art). See also In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 {CCPA)
`
`Page 957 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 2 of 97
`
`Application/Control Number:
`10/954,182
`Art Unit: 2823
`
`Page4
`
`(discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily
`
`within skill or art) and In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1995) (selection of optimum
`
`ranges within prior art general conditions is obvious).
`
`Note that the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of
`
`the claimed bandwith and frequency or any unexpected results arising therefrom.
`
`Where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen bahdwith and frequency
`
`or upon another variable recited in a claim, the Applicant must show that the chosen
`
`bandwith and frequency are critical.
`
`In re Woodruf, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d
`
`1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
`
`Claims 41, 45, 47, 49, 51, 52 and 85 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.103(a) as
`
`being unpatentable over Smolanoff et al. in view of Fu et al. as applied to claims 62 and
`
`87-89 above, and further in view of Li et al. (NPL provided in this office action).
`
`Re claim 85, The combination of Smolanoff et al. and Fu et al. does not disclose
`
`forming an oxide film by reactive sputtering in a mode between a metallic mode and a
`
`poison mode.
`
`Li et al. disclose changing from metallic mode to poison mode {page 5, fig. 3) and
`
`while a current of oxygen is present due to RF power producing 0 radicals which can
`
`oxidize the target (page 6).
`
`It would have been within the scope of one of ordinary skill in the art to combine
`
`the teachings of Smolanoff et al., Fu et al. and Li et al. to enable the oxide formation
`
`step of Li et al. to be performed in the process or Smolanoff and Fu to oxidize the target
`
`Page 958 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 3 of 97
`
`Application/Control Number:
`10/954,182
`Art Unit: 2823
`
`Page 5
`
`away from the sputtering track and therefore raises the secondary electron component
`
`of current.
`
`Re claim 41, Li et al. disclose wherein the target is a metallic target and the
`
`process gas includes oxygen (abstract)
`
`Re claim 45, Smolanoff et al. disclose wherein the magnetic field is provided by a
`
`moving magnetron (Col. 5, lines 39-49}.
`
`Re claim 47, Smolanoff et. al. disclose wherein the process gas includes a
`
`mixture of oxygen and argon (Col. 7, lines 22-27).
`
`Re claim 49, Smolanoff et al. disclose wherein the process gas further includes
`
`nitrogen (Col. 7, lines 25-26).
`
`Re claim 51, Smolanoff et al. disclose further including uniformly sweeping the
`
`target with a magnetic field (Col. 6, lines 1-6).
`
`Re claim 52, Smolanoff et al. disclose wherein sweeping the target with a
`
`magnetic field includes sweeping a magnet in one direction across the target where tbe
`
`magnet extends beyond the target in the opposite direction (Col. 6, lines 1-6).
`
`Claims 42, 48 and 50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a} as being unpatentable
`
`over Smolanoff et al. in view of Fu et al. and Li et al. as applied to claims 41, 45, 47, 49,
`
`51, 52 and 85 above, and further in view of Chen et al. (2004/0077161 ).
`
`Re claim 42, The combination of Smolanoff et al., Fu et al. and Li et al. does not
`
`disclose wherein the target is a metallic target and the process gas includes N2•
`
`Page 959 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 4 of 97
`
`Application/Control Number:
`10/954, 182
`Art Unit: 2823
`
`Page 6
`
`Chen et al. disclose wherein the target is a metallic target and the process gas
`
`includes N2 (Page 2, [0028] and [0030].
`
`It would have been within the scope of one of ordinary skill in the art to combine
`
`the teachings of Smolanoff, Fu, Li and Chen to enable the reactive gas step of the
`
`combination to be add nitrogen according to the teachings of Chen et al. because one
`
`of ordinary skill in the art would have been. motivated to look to alternative suitable
`
`methods of performing the disclosed reactive gas step of the combination and art
`
`recognized suitability for an intended purpose has been recognized to be motivation to
`
`combine. See MPEP 2144.07.
`
`Re claim 46, Chen et al. disclose further including holding the temperature of the
`
`substrate substantially constant (Page 3, Paragraph [0046]).
`
`Re claim 48, Chen et al. disclose wherein the oxygen flow is adjusted by the
`
`mass flow controllers; thereby it will adjust the index refraction of the film.
`
`Re claim 50, Chen et al disclose wherein providing pulsed DC power to a target
`
`includes providing pulsed DC power to a target, which has an area larger than that of
`
`the substrate (See fig. 3).
`
`Claims 43 and 53-58 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable
`
`over Smolanoff et al. in view of Fu et al. and Li et al. as applied to claims 41, 45, 47, 49,
`
`51, 52 and 85 above, and further in view of Milonopoulou et al. (2003/0175142).
`
`Re claim 43, the combination of Smolanoff et al., Fu et al. and Li et al. does not
`
`disclose wherein the target is a ceramic target.
`
`Page 960 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 5 of 97
`
`Application/Control Number:
`10/954,182
`Art Unit: 2823
`
`Page 7
`
`Milonopoulou et al. disclose forming a coating layer on a substrate; providing a
`
`target (12), which is ceramic (Abstract).
`
`It would have been within the scope of one of ordinary skill in the art to combine
`
`the teachings of Smolanoff et al., Fu et al., Li et al. and Milonopoulou et al. to enable the.
`
`target material of the combination to be the same according to the teachings of
`
`Milonopoulou et al. because one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated
`
`to look to alternative suitable target materials of the disclosed target of the combination
`
`and art recognized suitability for an intended purpose has been recognized to be
`
`motivation to combine. See MPEP 2144.07.
`
`Re claim 53, Milonopoulou et al. disclose wherein the target is an alloyed target
`
`(Abstract).
`
`Re claim 54, Milonopoulou et al. disclose wherein the alloyed target includes one or
`
`more rare earth ions.
`
`Re claim 55, Milonopoulou et al. disclose wherein the alloyed target includes Si and
`
`Al.
`
`Re claim 56, Milonopoulou et al. disclose wherein the alloyed target includes one or
`
`more elements taken from a set consisting of Si, Al, Er and Yb.
`
`Re claim 57, Milonopoulou et al. disclose wherein the alloyed target is a tiled target.
`
`Re claim 58, Milonopoulou et al. disclose wherein each tiled target is formed by pre-
`
`alloy atomization and hot isostatic pressing of a powder (Page 2, Paragraph [0020]).
`
`Page 961 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 6 of 97
`
`Application/Control Number:
`10/954,182
`Art Unit: 2823
`
`Page 8
`
`Conclusion
`
`. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to Michelle Estrada whose telephone number is 571-272-
`
`1858. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's
`
`supervisor, Matthew Smith can be reached on 571-272~1907. The fax phone number
`
`for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or
`
`proceedin.g should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is 571-272-
`
`2800.
`
`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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should
`
`you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic
`
`Business Center {EBC) af 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
`
`ME
`November 9, 2007
`
`Primary Examiner
`Art Unit 2823
`
`Page 962 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 7 of 97
`
`.
`
`.
`
`*
`
`Notice of References Cited
`
`Application/Control No.
`
`10/954, 182
`
`Examiner
`
`Michelle Estrada
`
`U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`Applicant(s)/Patent Under
`Reexamination
`ZHANG ET AL.
`
`Art Unit
`
`2823
`
`Page 1 of 1
`
`Document Number
`Country Code-Number-Kind Code
`
`Date
`MM-YYYY
`
`Name
`
`Classification
`
`US-
`
`A
`B US-
`c US-
`D US-
`E US-
`F US-
`G US-
`H US-
`US-
`
`I
`
`US-
`
`J
`K US-
`L US-
`M US-
`
`*
`
`Document Number
`Country Code-Number-Kind Code
`
`Date
`MM-YYYY
`
`Country
`
`Name
`
`Classification
`
`FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`N
`
`0
`
`p
`
`Q
`
`R
`s
`T
`
`*
`
`-
`
`NON-PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`Include as applicable: Author, Title Date, Publisher, Edition or Volume, Pertinent Pages)
`
`u
`
`Li, Ning et al., "Enhancement of aluminum oxide physical vapor deposition with a secondary plasma", November 28, 2001,
`Scien Direct, pages, 1-11.
`
`v
`
`w
`
`x
`
`*A copy of this reference 1s not being furnished with this Office action. (See MPEP § 707.05(a).)
`Dates in MM-YYYY format are publication dates. Classifications may be US or foreign.
`
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`PT0-892 (Rev. 01-2001)
`
`Notice of References Cited
`
`Part of Paper No. 20071109
`
`Page 963 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 8 of 97
`
`Appl!cation/Control No.
`
`Index of Claims
`
`111 111 1111 111 II 11 111
`
`10954182
`
`Examiner
`
`Estrada, Michelle
`
`Applicant{s)/Patent Under
`Reexamination
`
`ZHANG ET AL.
`
`Art Unit
`
`2823
`
`Rejected
`
`Allowed
`
`=
`
`Cancelled
`
`N Non-Elected
`
`Restricted
`
`Interference
`
`A
`
`0
`
`Appeal
`
`Objected
`
`D Claims renumbered in the same order as presented by applicant
`
`D CPA
`
`D T.D.
`
`D R.1.47
`
`DATE
`
`CLAIM
`Final
`Original
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`. 12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`29
`30
`. 31
`32
`33
`34
`35
`36
`
`07/16/2007 11/09/2007
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`Part of Paper No. : 20071109
`
`Page 964 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 9 of 97
`
`Application/Control No.
`
`Index of Claims
`
`II 111 11 11 Ill II 11 111
`
`10954182
`
`Examiner
`
`Estrada, Michelle
`
`Applicant(s)/Patent Under
`Reexamination
`
`ZHANG ET AL.
`
`Art Unit
`
`2823
`
`Rejected
`
`Cancelled
`
`N Non-Elected
`
`=
`
`Allowed
`
`Restricted
`
`Interference
`
`A
`
`0
`
`Appeal
`
`Objected
`
`D Claims renumbered in the same order as presented by applicant
`
`D CPA
`
`D T.D.
`
`D R.1.47
`
`DATE
`
`CLAIM
`Final
`Original
`37
`38
`39
`40
`41
`42
`43
`44
`45
`46
`47
`48
`49
`50
`51
`52
`53
`54
`55
`56
`57
`58
`59
`60
`61
`62
`63
`64
`65
`66
`67
`68
`69
`70
`71
`72
`
`,/
`
`./
`
`,/
`
`-
`
`,/
`
`./
`
`./
`
`./
`
`./
`
`,/
`
`07/16/2007 11/09/2007
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`=
`=
`=
`-
`=
`=
`=
`=
`=
`=
`=
`=
`=
`=
`=
`=
`=
`=
`-
`-
`-
`=
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`
`./
`
`,/
`
`./
`
`,/
`
`,/
`
`,/
`
`./
`
`,/
`
`-
`-
`-
`./
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`Part of Paper No. : 20071109
`
`Page 965 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 10 of 97
`
`Application/Control No.
`
`Index of Claims
`
`10954182
`
`111 Ill II II Ill II II I I Examiner
`
`Estrada, Michelle
`
`Applicant(s)/Patent Under
`Reexamination
`
`ZHANG ET AL.
`
`Art Unit
`
`2823
`
`Rejected
`
`Allowed
`
`=
`
`Cancelled
`
`N Non-Elected
`
`· Restricted
`
`Interference
`
`A
`
`0
`
`Appeal
`
`Objected
`
`D Claims renumbered in the same order as presented by applicant
`
`D CPA
`
`D T.D.
`
`D R.1.47
`
`DATE
`
`CLAIM
`Final
`Original
`73
`74
`75
`76
`77
`78
`79
`80
`81
`82
`83
`84
`85
`86
`87
`88
`89
`90
`91
`92
`93
`94
`95
`96
`97
`98
`99
`100
`101
`102
`103
`104
`105
`106
`107
`108
`
`07/16/2007 11/09/2007
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`- .
`=
`./
`-
`=
`=
`=
`-
`-
`-
`
`-
`
`./
`
`./
`
`./
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`-
`
`./
`
`./
`
`./
`
`./
`
`./
`
`./
`
`./
`
`./
`
`./
`
`./
`
`./
`
`,/
`
`,/
`
`,/
`
`./
`
`,/
`
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`Part of Paper No. : 20071109
`
`Page 966 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 11 of 97
`
`Application/Control No.
`
`Index of Claims
`
`111 111 11 11 II 11 11 II
`
`10954182
`
`Examiner
`
`Estrada, Michelle
`
`Applicant(s}/Patent Under •
`Reexamination
`
`ZHANG ET AL.
`
`Art Unit
`
`2823
`
`Rejected
`
`Cancelled
`
`N Non-Elected
`
`=
`
`Allowed
`
`Restricted
`
`Interference
`
`A
`
`0
`
`Appeal
`
`Objected
`
`D Claims renumbered in the same order as presented by applicant
`
`D CPA
`
`D T.D.
`
`D R.1.47
`
`CLAIM
`I Original
`Final
`I
`109
`
`07/16/2007111/09/2007 I
`I
`I
`-
`
`./
`
`I
`I
`
`DATE
`
`I
`I
`
`I
`I
`
`I
`I
`
`I
`I
`
`I
`I
`
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`Part of Paper No. : 20071109
`
`Page 967 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 12 of 97
`
`-
`
`Application/Control No.
`
`Search Notes
`
`111 111 1111 111 II 11 111
`
`10954182
`
`Examiner
`
`Estrada, Michelle
`
`Applicant{s)/Patent Under
`Reexamination
`
`ZHANG ET AL.
`
`Art Unit
`
`2823
`
`SEARCHED
`
`Subclass
`
`Date
`11/6/07
`
`Examiner
`ME
`
`E23.132,E21.091,E21.169,E21.2,E21.462
`
`11/6/07
`
`ME
`
`Class
`Updated as
`before
`257
`
`SEARCH NOTES
`
`See East search attached
`google search
`
`Search Notes
`
`Date
`11/6/07
`11/5/07
`
`Examiner
`ME
`ME
`
`Class
`
`I
`I
`
`INTERFERENCE SEARCH
`
`Subclass
`
`Date
`
`I
`I
`
`I Examiner
`I
`
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`Part of Paper No. : 20071109
`
`Page 968 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 13 of 97
`
`PATE~
`Customer No. 22,85
`Attorney Docket No. 10655.0016-01
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`)
`)
`) Group Art Unit: 2823
`)
`) Examiner: Michelle ESTRADA
`)
`)
`)
`) Confirmation No.: 9873
`)
`
`In re Application of:
`
`Hongmei ZHANG et al.
`
`Application No.: 10/954,182
`
`Filed: October 1, 2004
`
`For: BIASED PULSE DC REACTIVE
`SPUTTERING OF OXIDE FILMS
`
`MAIL STOP AMENDMENT
`Commissioner for Patents
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`Sir:
`
`AMENDMENT AND RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION
`
`In reply to the Office Action mailed November 15, 2007, please amend the
`
`above-identified application as follows:
`
`Amendments to the Claims are reflected in the listing of claims in this paper beginning
`
`on page 2.
`
`Remarks/ Arguments follow the amendment sections of this paper beginning on page 7.
`
`Attachments to this amendment include: Copies of referenced articles by P.F. Cheng
`
`et al., J. Vac. Sci. Techol. B 13 2 (1995), pp. 203-208, and S. M. Rossnagel et al., Appl. Phys.
`
`Lett. 63 (1993), p. 24.
`
`Page 969 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 14 of 97
`
`U.S. Application No. 10/954,182
`Attorney Docket No. 10655.0016-01
`
`AMENDMENTS TO THE CLAIMS:
`
`This listing of claims will replace all prior versions and listings of claims in the
`
`application:
`
`Claims 1-40 (Canceled).
`
`Claim 41 (Previously presented): The method of claim 85 wherein the target is a metallic
`
`target and the process gas includes oxygen.
`
`Claim 42 (Previously presented): The method of claim 85 wherein the target is a metallic
`
`target and the process gas includes one or more of a set consisting of N2, NH3, CO, NO, C02,
`
`halide containing gasses.
`
`Claim 43 (Previously presented): The method of claim 85 wherein the target is a ceramic
`
`target.
`
`Claim 44 (Canceled).
`
`Claim 45 (Previously presented): The method of claim 85 wherein the magnetic field is
`
`provided by a moving magnetron.
`
`Claim 46 (Previously presented) The method of claim 85 further including holding the
`
`temperature of the substrate substantially constant.
`
`Page 970 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 15 of 97
`
`U.S. Application No. 10/954,182
`Attorney Docket No. 10655.0016-01
`
`Claim 47 (Previously presented): The method of claim 85 wherein the process gas
`
`includes a mixture of Oxygen and Argon.
`
`Claim 48 (Previously presented): - --- method of claim 85 wherein the Oxygen flow is
`
`adjusted to adjust the index of refraction of the flm.
`
`Claim 49 (Previously presented): The method of claim 85 wherein the process gas
`
`further includes nitrogen.
`
`Claim 50 (Previously presented): The method of claim 85 wherein providing pulsed DC
`
`power to a target includes providing pulsed DC power to a target which has an area larger than
`
`that of the substrate.
`
`Claim 51 (Previously presented): The method of claim 85, further including uniformly
`
`sweeping the target with a magnetic field.
`
`Claim 52 (Previously presented): The method of claim 51 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.
`
`Claim 53 (Previously presented): The method of claim 85 wherein the target is an
`
`alloyed target.
`
`-3-
`
`Page 971 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 16 of 97
`
`U.S. Application No. 10/954,182
`Attorney Docket No. 10655.0016-01
`
`Claim 54 (Previously presented): The method of claim 53 wherein the alloyed target
`
`includes one or more rare-earth ions.
`
`Claim 55 (Previously presented): The method of claim 53 wherein the alloyed target
`
`includes Si and Al.
`
`Claim 56 (Previously presented): The method of claim 53 wherein the alloyed target
`
`includes one or more elements taken from a set consisting of Si, Al, Er, Yb, Zn, Ga, Ge, P, As,
`
`Sn, Sb, Pb, Ag, Au, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy Ho, Tm, and Lu.
`
`Claim 57 (Previously presented): The method of claim 53 wherein the alloyed target is a
`
`tiled target.
`
`Claim 58 (Previously presented): The method of claim 57 wherein each tile of the tiled
`
`target is formed by prealloy atomization and hot isostatic pressing of a powder.
`
`Claims 59-61 (Canceled).
`
`Claim 62 (Currently amended): A method of depositing a film on [[a]] an insulating
`
`substrate, comprising:
`
`providing a process gas between a conductive target and [[a]] the substrate;
`
`providing pulsed DC power to the target through a narrow band rejection filter such that
`
`the target alternates between positive and negative voltages;
`
`-4-
`
`Page 972 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 17 of 97
`
`providing an RF bias at a frequency that corresponds to the narrow band rejection filter to
`
`U.S. Application No. 10/954,182
`Attorney Docket No. 10655.0016-01
`
`the substrate;
`
`providing a magnetic field to the target; and
`
`reconditioning the target;
`
`wherein reconditioning the target includes reactive sputtering in the metallic mode and
`
`then reactive sputtering in the poison mode.
`
`Claims 63-84 (Canceled).
`
`Claim 85 (Currently amended): A method of depositing [[a]] an insulating film on a
`
`substrate, comprising:
`
`providing a process gas between a target and a substrate;
`
`providing pulsed DC power to the target through a narrow band rejection filter such that
`
`the voltage on the target alternates between positive and negative voltages;
`
`providing an RF bias that corresponds to the narrow band rejection filter to the substrate;
`
`providing a magnetic field to the target;-aHEI
`
`wherein [[a]] an oxide material is deposited on the substrate, and fHl: oxide the insulating
`
`film is formed by reactive sputtering in a mode between a metallic mode and a poison mode.
`
`Claims 86-87 (Canceled).
`
`-5-
`
`Page 973 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 18 of 97
`
`U.S. Application No. 10/954,182
`Attorney Docket No. 10655.0016-01
`
`Claim 88 (Currently amended): The method according to claim [[87]] 85, wherein the
`
`narrow band-rejection filter has a bandwidth of about 100 kHz.
`
`Claim 89 (Previously presented): The method according to claim [[87]] 85, wherein the
`
`RF frequency is about 2 MHz.
`
`Claims 90-109 (Canceled).
`
`-6-
`
`Page 974 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 19 of 97
`
`U.S. Application No. 10/954,182
`Attorney Docket No. 10655.0016-01
`
`REMARKS
`
`Claims 41-43, 45-58, 62, 85, and 87-89 are pending in the above-identified application.
`
`The Examiner has rejected claims 41-43, 45-58, 62, 85, and 87-89. In this amendment, claims
`
`62 and 85 have been amended as agreed during an Interview held on December 11, 2007. Claim
`
`87 has been cancelled.
`
`Examiner's Interview
`
`Applicants thank the Examiner for meeting with us on December 11, 2007 (the
`
`"Interview"). In attendance at the Interview were Examiner Michelle Estrada, Inventor R. Ernest
`
`Demaray, and Applicants' representative Gary J. Edwards. During the interview, all of the
`
`claims were discussed as well as the art that has been cited against the claims. Agreement with
`
`respect to the claims was reached. In this Amendment, the claims have been amended as
`
`discussed during the interview. The Examiner indicated in the Interview Summary that the
`
`proposed language for the claims "would overcome the rejection on record."
`
`The substance of the discussion with the Examiner with respect to the claims and the art
`
`is provided below.
`
`Claims 62 and 87-89
`
`Claim Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
`
`Claims 62, and 87-89 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,117,279 to Smolanoff et al. ("Smolanoff') in view of U.S. Patent No.
`
`6,306,265 to Fu et al. ("Fu"). As discussed during the interview, Smolanoff teaches away from a
`
`system where the target voltage becomes positive, and therefore teaches away from "providing
`
`pulsed DC power to the target through a narrow band rejection filter such that the target
`
`Page 975 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 20 of 97
`
`U.S. Application No. 10/954,182
`Attorney Docket No. 10655.0016-01
`
`alternates between positive and negative voltages" and "providing an RF bias at a frequency that
`
`corresponds to the narrow band rejection filter to the substrate," as is recited in claims 62.
`
`Additionally, because Smolanoff teaches away from the elements of claim 62, there is no reason
`
`to combine Smolanoff with Fu as is suggested by the Examiner. However, even if they were
`
`combinable, the combination of Smolanoff and Fu does not teach or suggest the combination of
`
`"providing pulsed DC power to the target through a narrow band rejection filter such that the
`
`target alternates between positive and negative voltages" and "providing an RF bias at a
`
`frequency that corresponds to the narrow band rejection filter to the substrate," as is recited in
`
`claim 62.
`
`Smolanoff teaches a directed ion metal vapor source for deposition of conductive films.
`
`Although Smolanoff states that the DC source can be a pulsed DC source, Smolanoff also states
`
`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, -col. 6, line 1) (emphasis
`
`added). In every disclosure of target voltage, Smolanoff teaches that the target voltage must be
`
`negative. (See, e.g. col. 5, lines 39-44 ("[t]he magnet structure 20 preferably includes magnets
`
`that produce a closed magnetic tunnel over the surface of the target 16 that traps electrons given
`
`off into the chamber 12 by the cathode assembly 17 when the cathode assembly 17 is electrically
`
`energized to a negative potential as is familiar to one skilled in the art"); col. 6, lines 9-12
`
`("[t]his main plasma in the region 23 becomes a source of positive ions of gas that are
`
`accelerated toward, and collide against, the negatively charged surface of the target 16,
`
`thereby ejecting particles of coating material from the target 16") (emphasis added)).
`
`Smolanoff never teaches that the target can be positive and, in accordance with the
`
`teachings of Smolanoff, the target voltage must always be negative. Therefore. Smolanoff
`
`Page 976 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 21 of 97
`
`U.S. Application No. 10/954,182
`Attorney Docket No. 10655.0016-01
`
`teaches away from "providing pulsed DC power to the target through a narrow band rejection
`
`filter such that the target alternates between positive and negative voltages" as is recited in claim
`
`62. Additionally, Smolanoff then teaches away from the combination "providing pulsed DC
`
`power to the target through a narrow band rejection filter such that the voltage on the target
`
`alternates between positive and negative voltages" and "providing an RF bias that corresponds to
`
`the narrow band rejection filter to the substrate," as is recited in claim 62.
`
`Even if Smolanoff could be combined with Fu as suggested, the combination would not
`
`teach or suggest the claimed invention. The Examiner stated that "Smolanoff et al. do not clearly
`
`disclose reconditioning the target; and wherein reconditioning the target includes reactive
`
`sputtering in the metallic mode and then reactive sputtering in the poison mode." (Office Action,
`
`page 2). Fu is relied upon to disclose "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
`
`a poisonous mode to prepare the surface (Col. 19, lines 35-40)." (Office Action, page 2).
`
`Fu teaches high density, magnetic field enhanced ionized metal vapor deposition of
`
`conducting films. (See Fu, abstract). Fu, however, teaches utilization of a DC power supply (Fu,
`
`col. 1, lines 30-32) in combination with an RF bias applied to the substrate (Fu, col. 2, lines 36-
`
`41). Therefore, Fu fails to teach the combination "providing pulsed DC power to the target
`
`through a narrow band rejection filter such that the voltage on the target alternates between
`
`positive and negative voltages" and "providing an RF bias that corresponds to the narrow band
`
`rejection filter to the substrate," as is recited in claim 62.
`
`Fu does teach operation in the poison mode and operation in the metallic mode as applied
`
`to TiN deposition, but does not teach "wherein an oxide material is deposited on the substrate,
`
`Page 977 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 22 of 97
`
`U.S. Application No. 10/954,182
`Attorney Docket No. 10655.0016-01
`
`and the insulating film is formed by reactive sputtering in a mode between a metallic mode and a
`
`poison mode," as is recited in claim 62. As stated by Fu,
`
`Reactive sputtering to produce TiN is known to operate in two
`modes, metallic mode and poison mode. Metallic mode produces a
`high-density, gold-colored film on the wafer. Poison mode, which
`is often associated with a high nitrogen flow, produces a
`purple/brown film which advantageously has low stress. However,
`the poison-mode film has many grain boundaries, and film defects
`severely reduce chip yield. Furthermore, the deposition rate in
`poison mode is typically only one-quarter of the rate in metallic
`mode. It is generally believed that in poison mode the nitrogen
`reacts with the target to form a TiN surface on the Ti target while
`in metallic mode the target surface remains clean and TiN forms
`only the wafer.
`
`(Fu, col. 19, lines 28-30). Fu teaches operation in either metallic mode or poison mode, and does
`
`not teach "wherein an oxide material is deposited on the substrate, and the insulating film is
`
`formed by reactive sputtering in a mode between a metallic mode and a poison mode," as is
`
`recited in claim 62.
`
`Therefore, claim 62 is allowable over the combination of Smolanoff and Fu. Similar to
`
`the discussion regarding claim 62, the combination of Smolanoff and Fu does not teach
`
`"providing pulsed DC power to the target through a narrow band rejection filter such that the
`
`voltage on the target alternates between positive and negative voltages" in combination with
`
`"providing an RF bias that corresponds to the narrow band rejection filter to the substrate," as is
`
`recited in claim 85. Further, Fu does not teach "wherein an oxide material is deposited on the
`
`substrate, and the insulating film is formed by reactive sputtering in a mode between a metallic
`
`mode and a poison mode," as is recited in claim 85. Claim 87 has been canceled. Claims 88-89
`
`depend from claim 85 and are therefore allowable for at least the same reasons as is claim 85.
`
`In addition, the Examiner initially indicated, with regard to the narrow band-rejection
`
`filter, that "[u]sing an specific type of filter is a matter of design choice depending on the quality
`
`-10-
`
`Page 978 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 23 of 97
`
`U.S. Application No. 10/954,182
`Attorney Docket No. 10655.0016-01
`
`of product needed, and it is obvious that the filter is going to work at certain frequencies."
`
`(Office Action, page 3). However, as explained during the interview, that is not the case. The
`
`narrow band rejection filter allows the combination of pulsed-de power to the target (where the
`
`target voltage is oscillated between positive and negative voltages) and an RF bias on the
`
`substrate. A filter that blocks too many of the constituent frequencies of the pulsed DC
`
`waveform results in the target voltage not attaining a positive voltage. A filter that does not
`
`block the RF bias voltage can result in failure of the DC power supply. Smolanoff does not
`
`teach the "narrow band rejection filtering" recited in each of claims 62 and 85.
`
`Claims 41. 45. 47. 49. 51. 52. and 85
`
`Claims 41, 45, 47, 49, 51, 52, and 85 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
`
`unpatentable over Smolanoff in view of Fu, as applied to claims 62, and 87-89, and in further
`
`view of reference titled "Enhancement of Aluminum Oxide Physical Vapor Deposition with a
`
`Secondary Plasma" to Li et al. ("Li"). As discussed above, claim 85 is allowable over the
`
`combination of Smolanoff and Fu. Li also fails to teach "providing pulsed DC power to the
`
`target through a narrow band rejection filter such that the voltage on the target alternates between
`
`positive and negative voltages" in combination with "providing an RF bias that corresponds to
`
`the narrow band rejection filter to the substrate," as is recited in claim 85.
`
`At best, Li teaches a pulsed DC source with a positive target voltage and a DC substrate
`
`bias. With regard to substrate bias, Li states that
`
`The angular distribution of the sputtered atoms is roughly a cosine
`distribution, and is further broadened by gas phase scattering,
`yielding insufficient bottom coverage and voids during filling of
`high aspect ratio features. This problem is solved by ionizing the
`metal flux and applying a bias on the substrate, accelerating
`
`-11-
`
`Page 979 of 1053
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00636-ADA Document 76-1 Filed 03/10/21 Page 24 of 97
`
`U.S. Application No. 10/954,18'.1
`Attorne