Ex Parte Kikuchi et al - Page 2

               Appeal 2007-2490                                                                           
               Application 09/846,255                                                                     
                                                                                                         
                                     STATEMENT OF THE CASE                                                
                     Appellants invented a cleaning process for selectively removing an                   
               unnecessary film from a semiconductor substrate surface, yet leaving                       
               another necessary film intact.  Specifically, a mixed gas comprising                       
               anhydrous hydrogen fluoride (HF) gas and a heated inert gas is continuously                
               brought into contact with the surface of the substrate.  As a result, the                  
               unnecessary low-density film can be removed without impairing the                          
               necessary high-density film beyond a tolerance.1  Claim 1 is illustrative with             
               the key limitation in dispute emphasized:                                                  
                     1.        A process for cleaning a surface of a substrate, said surface              
                               carrying thereon a high-density film and a low-density film                
                               lower in density than said high-density film in combination,               
                               which comprises continuously bringing a mixed gas                          
                               comprising anhydrous hydrogen fluoride gas and a heated                    
                               inert gas into contact with said surface of said substrate such            
                               that at least a portion of said low-density film is removed                
                               without impairing said high-density film beyond a tolerance,               
                               wherein the mixed gas does not contain steam.                              
                     [Emphasis added.]                                                                    

                     The Examiner relies on the following prior art references to show                    
               unpatentability:                                                                           
               Mehta                     US 5,635,102             Jun. 3, 1997                            
               Verhaverbeke              US 5,922,624             Jul. 13, 1999                           

                     Claims 1-3 and 5-14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as                       
               unpatentable over Mehta and Verhaverbeke.                                                  

                                                                                                         
               1 See generally Abstract; Specification 1:4-12 and 10:3-12.                                

                                                    2                                                     

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013