Ex Parte Bencher

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Mar 25, 2014

12119836 (P.T.A.B. Mar. 25, 2014)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
12/119,836 05/13/2008 Christopher D. Bencher 12033/USA/MTCG/DETCH/JW 3802
45401 7590 03/26/2014
BLAKELY SOKOLOFF TAYLOR & ZAFMAN LLP
1279 Oakmead Parkway
Sunnyvale, CA 94085-4040
EXAMINER
CAMPBELL, SHAUN M
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2829
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
03/26/2014 PAPER
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.
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
__________

Ex parte CHRISTOPHER D. BENCHER
__________

Appeal 2011-009222
Application 12/119,836
Technology Center 2800
___________

Before ADRIENE LEPIANE HANLON, CATHERINE Q. TIMM, and
JAMES C. HOUSEL, Administrative Patent Judges.

HANLON, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

App
App

rejec
§ 6(b
pilla
App
acco
fabri
eal 2011-0
lication 12
A. ST
The App
tion of cla
).
We AFF
The subj
r patternin
ellant’s FI
rdance wit
Ap
Accordin
cated as fo
The ima
be provi
[T]he im
then pro
09222
/119,836
ATEMEN
ellant file
ims 5-11 a
IRM.
ect matter
g using mu
G. 2A, rep
h an embo
pellant’s F
g to the A
llows:
ge of a ser
ded to a m
age of a s
vided to th
T OF TH
d an appea
nd 13-19.
on appeal
ltiple spa
roduced b
diment of
IG. 2A de
ppellant’s
ies of lines
ask layer t
eries of lin
e patterne
2
E CASE
l under 35
We have
is directed
cer masks.
elow, illus
the invent
picts a pil
Specifica
from a fir
o form a p
es from a
d mask lay
U.S.C. §
jurisdictio
to a meth
Spec. ¶ [
trates a pil
ion. Spec
lar etch ma
tion, the m
st spacer m
atterned m
second spa
er to form
134 from t
n under 35
od of self
0013]. Th
lar etch m
. ¶ [0018].
sk 270A.
ask may b
ask may
ask layer.
cer mask
a pillar m
he final
U.S.C.
-aligned
e
ask in

e
first
. . .
is
ask
App
App

Spec

frequ
Spec

eal 2011-0
lication 12
compris
from the
lines fro
. ¶ [0014]
The App
ency of a
[I]n acco
spacer m
to the sid
That is,
the spac
. ¶ [0015]
The App
App
first sacri
09222
/119,836
ed of a ser
second sp
m the first
.
ellant also
lithograph
rdance wi
ask is fab
ewalls of
for every l
er mask ar
.
ellant’s FI
ellant’s FI
ficial mask
ies of pilla
acer mask
spacer ma
discloses
ic pattern
th an emb
ricated hav
a lithograp
ine in the s
e generate
G. 4D, rep
G. 4D is a
410 and s
3
rs. The im
is non-pa
sk.
that the sp
to be doub
odiment of
ing spacer
hically pa
acrificial
d.
roduced b
cross-sec
pacer line

age of the
rallel with
acer mask
led:
the prese
lines form
tterned sa
mask, two
elow, is il
tional view
s of first s
series of
the series
s enable th
nt inventio
ed adjace
crificial m
spacer lin
lustrative.
depicting
pacer mas
lines
of
e
n, a
nt
ask.
es of

k 414.
Appeal 2011-009222
Application 12/119,836

4

The Appellant discloses that the frequency of the first sacrificial mask
(410) may be doubled by removing the first sacrificial mask and leaving
only the first spacer mask (414). Spec. ¶¶ [0034]; see also FIG. 4E. The
Appellant discloses that the frequency of the second sacrificial mask may be
doubled in the same manner. Spec. ¶ [0044]; see also FIG. 4L.
Claim 5, reproduced below, is directed to a method of fabricating a
pillar etch mask using first and second spacer masks and first and second
sacrificial masks.
5. A method for fabricating a semiconductor mask,
comprising:
[1] providing a semiconductor structure having a first
sacrificial mask comprised of a first series of lines above a
mask layer;
[2] forming a first spacer mask having spacer lines
adjacent to the sidewalls of said first series of lines of said first
sacrificial mask;
[3] removing said first sacrificial mask; and
subsequently,
[4] providing the image of the spacer lines from said first
spacer mask to said mask layer to form a patterned mask layer
of repeating lines and unfilled gaps; and, without filling the
gaps;
[5] removing the spacer lines from the patterned mask
layer; and, subsequently,
[6] forming a second sacrificial mask comprised of a
second series of lines above said patterned mask layer and in
portions of the unfilled gaps of the patterned mask layer;
[7] forming a second spacer mask having spacer lines
adjacent to the sidewalls of said second series of lines of said
second sacrificial mask, wherein the spacer lines of said second
Appeal 2011-009222
Application 12/119,836

5

spacer mask are non-parallel with the image of the spacer lines
from said first spacer mask in said patterned mask layer;
[8] removing said second sacrificial mask; and,
subsequently,
[9] providing the image of the spacer lines from said
second spacer mask to said patterned mask layer to form a pillar
mask layer comprised of a series of pillars.
App. Br., Claims App’x (emphasis and numbering added).1
The claims stand rejected as follows: claims 9-11 and 17-19 under
35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite; and claims 5-11 and
13-19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Abatchev2 in view of
Kerber.3
B. DISCUSSION
1. Rejection under § 112, second paragraph
Claims 9 and 17 recite that “the pitch of said first series of lines of
said first sacrificial mask is approximately 4,” and claims 11 and 19 recite
that “the pitch of said second series of lines of said second sacrificial mask is
approximately 4.” App. Br., Claims App’x.
The Examiner finds “the ordinary definition of a pitch is the distance
from the center of one line to the center of an adjacent line or the distance
from the side of one line to the same side of an adjacent line.” Ans. 4.4 The
Examiner concludes that claims 9, 11, 17, and 19 are indefinite “since there
are no units of measurement provided for the term ‘4’” and claims 10 and 18

1 Appeal Brief dated January 10, 2011.
2 US 2006/0263699 A1, published November 23, 2006.
3 US 5,916,821, issued June 29, 1999.
4 Examiner’s Answer dated March 7, 2011.
App
App

are i
Ans.
prov
unde
Mile
phot
stack

inven
in th
mask
eal 2011-0
lication 12
ndefinite b
3.
The App
ides a wor
“The te
rstand the
s Lab., Inc
The App
oresist lay
(404). Sp
Appell
The App
tion, the w
e range of
[414] is t
09222
/119,836
ased on th
ellant argu
kable defi
st for defin
bounds of
. v. Shand
ellant’s FI
er (402) fo
ec. ¶ [002
ant’s FIG.
on
ellant disc
idth ‘x’ o
10 – 100 n
argeted su
eir depend
es that pa
nition of “
iteness is
the claim
on, Inc., 9
G. 4A, rep
r forming
0].
4A depict
a semicon
loses that
f each fea
anometer
ch that the
6
ence on c
ragraph [0
pitch.” Ap
whether on
when read
97 F.2d 87
roduced b
a first sacr
s a photor
ductor sta
in an emb
ture of pat
s and “a su
width of
laims 9 an
022] of th
p. Br. 9-1
e skilled
in light o
0, 875 (Fe
elow, illu
ificial ma
esist layer
ck (400).
odiment o
terned pho
bsequentl
the spacer
d 17, respe
e Specifica
0.
in the art w
f the speci
d. Cir. 19
strates a pa
sk in a firs
(402) form
f the prese
toresist la
y fabricate
lines of th
ctively.
tion
ould
fication.”
93).
tterned
t mask

ed
nt
yer 402 is
d spacer
e spacer

Appeal 2011-009222
Application 12/119,836

7

mask are substantially the same as the width ‘x’ of each feature of patterned
photoresist layer 402.” Spec., para. [0022].
The Appellant continues:
[T]he spacing between subsequently formed spacer lines is
targeted to be substantially equal to the width of each spacer
region. Thus, in one embodiment, because the frequency of the
first spacer mask will ultimately be doubled, the spacing ‘y’
between each feature in patterned photoresist 402 is
approximately equal to 3 times the value ‘x,’ as depicted in
Figure 4A. That is, the pitch of patterned photoresist layer 402
is selected to be approximately 4 in order to ultimately provide
a first spacer mask with spacer lines having a pitch of
approximately 2.
Spec. ¶ [0022].
Based on the foregoing, we conclude that the Appellant has defined
the term “pitch” in sufficient detail that one of ordinary skill in the art would
understand the bounds of claims 9, 11, 17, and 19 when read in light of the
Specification. See Miles Lab., 997 F.2d at 875 (“If the claims read in light
of the specification reasonably apprise those skilled in the art of the scope of
the invention, § 112 demands no more.”). Therefore, the § 112, second
paragraph, rejection is not sustained.
2. Rejection under § 103(a)5
The only difference between the method recited in the Appellant’s
claim 5 and the method disclosed in Abatchev involves step [6] of claim 5
(i.e., “forming a second sacrificial mask comprised of a second series of

5 The Appellant argues the patentability of claims 5-11 and 13-19 as a group.
Therefore, for purposes of this appeal, claims 6-11 and 13-19 stand or fall
with the patentability of claim 5. 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii).
Appeal 2011-009222
Application 12/119,836

8

lines above said patterned mask layer and in portions of the unfilled gaps of
the patterned mask layer” (emphasis added)).
After Abatchev removes the spacer lines (182) (i.e., step [5] in
Appellant’s claim 5), a filler material (190) is blanket deposited on the
existing structure. Ans. 5; see also Abatchev ¶ [0099]. Abatchev
subsequently forms a second sacrificial mask comprised of a second series
of lines above a patterned mask layer as recited in the Appellant’s claim 5
(i.e., step [6] in Appellant’s claim 5). However, Abatchev’s second
sacrificial mask cannot be said to be formed in “unfilled gaps of the
patterned mask layer” as recited in claim 5 because those gaps were filled in
the previous step by filler material 190. See Ans. 5; see also Abatchev ¶¶
[0102], [0107] (second sacrificial mask is formed over a pattern of stripes
212 formed in layer 150 and stripes 214 which are the remaining portions of
filler material 190).
Nonetheless, the Examiner directs our attention to Kerber which, like
the Appellant’s invention and Abatchev, is directed to a method of self-
aligned pillar patterning using multiple spacer masks. The Examiner relies
on Kerber to establish that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art to omit the step of depositing filler material 190 in Abatchev’s
method. Ans. 5-6.
The Appellant argues “if the method of Abatchev were modified by
the method of Kerber, then the fill material 190 would no longer be used in
the method of Abatchev. Instead, the gaps in the patterned mask of
Abatchev would be filled by an overlying mask material, as described in
Appeal 2011-009222
Application 12/119,836

9

Kerber.”6 App. Br. 12-13. However, the Appellant argues the fill material
190 “is vital in the method of Abatchev . . . since it later enables selective
and protective patterning of the mask and surrounding materials, all of
which are protected by the fill material 190.” App. Br. 13. Thus, the
Appellant argues that removing fill material 190 from the method of
Abatchev “would impermissibly modify the method of Abatchev.” App. Br.
13.
The Examiner finds:
[T]he filler material 190 is only used to form a planar surface
for the deposition of the next layers thereon, the obvious reason
one would form this planar surface is so that the following
layers may be formed with good critical dimensions. However,
the teaching of Kerber shows that this planar surface is not
necessary for the formation of the spacer masks (figs 4a-c and
col. 4, line 57 to col. 5, line 38).
Ans. 13. Indeed, Kerber forms a spacer mask by filling the gaps 3’ in the
patterned mask with an overlying mask material and forms the spacer mask
9 thereon. See Kerber, col. 4, ll. 57-67.
Moreover, the Examiner finds that the method of Abatchev and the
modified Abatchev method result in the same structure. Ans. 13. Thus, the
Examiner concludes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill
in the art to omit the step of depositing filler material 190 in Abatchev’s
method based on the teachings in Kerber to “allow the device to be made
more quickly and cheaply because of the elimination of one of the
processing steps.” Ans. 12-13; see also App. Br. 11 (the claimed method

6 The Appellant also fills the gaps in the patterned mask with an overlying
mask material. Spec. ¶ [0040].
Appeal 2011-009222
Application 12/119,836

10

permits fabrication “without the added manufacturing steps and cost of
additional intermediate steps for filling the gaps in the pattern of the
patterned mask layer”).
The Appellant has failed to direct us to any error in the Examiner’s
findings of fact or conclusions of law. Therefore, the § 103(a) rejection is
sustained.
C. DECISION
The Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 9-11 and 17-19 under
35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, is reversed.
The Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 5-11 and 13-19 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Abatchev in view of Kerber is
affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1).

AFFIRMED

cdc