DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election with traverse of Group II, Species III-Figure 4, Species A-Figure 5A in the reply filed on August 24, 2020 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-10 and 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention and species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
The traversal is on the ground(s) that the exact pedestal is in claims 1 and 11. This is not found persuasive because the search areas for method claims are different than for apparatus claims due to their different classifications (i.e. The inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification).
Note. With respect to applicant’s species argument, Species III-Figure 4 and Species V-Figure-8 will be examined and hence Species V is withdrawn from the election of species requirement.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of 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 owned as of 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.
Claim(s) 11-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen et al. (U.S. 2018/0342375) in view of Lin et al. (U.S. 2017/0278682) or Okunishi et al. (U.S. 2018/0309423).
Referring to Figures 1, 4, and 5 and paragraphs [0017]-[0036], Nguyen et al. disclose a method of forming a plasma within a semiconductor processing chamber, the method comprising: flowing a precursor 160 into a processing region 115 of the semiconductor processing chamber 102 (par.[0019]), the processing region being at least partially defined by a pedestal 110 configured to support a substrate (par.[0020]), wherein: the pedestal comprises an electrode 110, 112 operable to form a plasma within the processing region of the semiconductor processing chamber (pars.[0027],[0030]), the processing region at least partially defined by the pedestal, the pedestal comprises a heater element 120 embedded within the pedestal, the heater element having an inlet line and outlet line such that the inlet line and the outlet line are connected to the same heater element; the inlet line of the heater element is coupled with a power supply 126, an RF filter 124 is coupled to the inlet line and the outlet line between the power supply and the heater element (par.[0020]), a first shunt capacitor 122 to ground is connected to the inlet line between the RF filter 124 and the heater element (Fig. 1, par.[0051]), wherein a capacitance of the first shunt capacitor is adjustable by a controller 190 (pars[0026]-[0035]); and forming a plasma of the precursor to produce plasma effluents (par.[0030]).
Nguyen et al. is silent on a second shunt capacitor to ground is connected to the outlet line between the RF filter and the heater element, wherein a capacitance of the second shunt capacitor is adjustable by a controller.
First, referring to Figure 9 and paragraph [0042], Lin et al. teach a plasma processing apparatus wherein a heater element 902 has an inlet line and an outlet line. A first shunt capacitor 910 to ground is connected to the inlet line of the heater element and a second shunt capacitor 912 to ground is connected to the outlet line of the heater element. The first shunt capacitor 910 and second shunt capacitor 912 are connected to ground via conductors 904, 906 to the grounded power box 103. Second, referring to Figure 3 and paragraph [0060], Okunishi et al. teach a plasma processing apparatus wherein a heater element HT has an inlet line 54a and an outlet line 54b. A first shunt capacitor 62 to ground is connected to the inlet line of the heater element and a second shunt capacitor 62 to ground is connected to the outlet line of the heater element. Third, as stated above, Nguyen et al. teach that a first shunt capacitor is used to adjust the impedance between the heating element 120 and the RF filter 124 and thus control the plasma density proximate to the heating element (par.[0021]). Thus, it is an obvious design choice to include a second shunt capacitor that is connected to the outlet line between the RF filter and the heater element, wherein a capacitance of the second shunt capacitor is adjustable by a controller in order to further adjust impedance between the heating element and the RF filter. Lastly, mere duplication of parts (i.e. second shunt capacitor) has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of Nguyen et al. with a second shunt capacitor that is connected to the outlet line of the heater element as taught by Lin et al. or Okunishi et al. since it is an alternate arrangement that would further adjust impedance between the heating element and the RF filter and ultimately control the plasma density proximate to the heating element. The resulting apparatus of Nguyen et al. in view of Lin et al. or Okunishi et al. would yield a second shunt capacitor is connected to the outlet line between the RF filter and the heater element, wherein a capacitance of the second shunt capacitor is adjustable by a controller.
PNG
media_image1.png
574
734
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
488
794
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 12, the method of forming a plasma of Nguyen et al. further comprising operating a motor 127 coupled with the first shunt capacitor 122 to adjust the capacitance of the first shunt capacitor (pars.[0021]-[0023]).
With respect to claim 13, the method of forming a plasma of Nguyen et al. further includes wherein increasing the capacitance of the first shunt capacitor 122 reduces an impedance at the first heater element (pars.[0021]-[0023]).
With respect to claim 14, the method of forming a plasma of Nguyen et al. further includes wherein the heater element is disposed within the pedestal proximate a radial edge of the pedestal, and wherein increasing the capacitance of the first shunt capacitor reduces a thickness of an envelope of the plasma proximate the radial edge of the pedestal (pars.[0021]-[0023]).
With respect to claim 15, the method of forming a plasma of Nguyen et al. further includes wherein the pedestal comprises a ceramic, and wherein the electrode is coupled with an RF generator 150 (par.[0027]).
With respect to claim 16, the method of forming a plasma of Nguyen et al. further includes wherein the RF generator is configured to operate at 13.56 MHz (par.[0027]).
With respect to claim 17, the method of forming a plasma of Nguyen et al. further comprising a plurality of heaters elements 120, 130, wherein each heater element of the plurality of heater elements is coupled with a separate RF filter 124, 134, and wherein a separate shunt capacitor 122, 132 is positioned between each heater element and separate RF filter (pars. [0020]-[0021]).
With respect to claim 18, the method of forming a plasma of Nguyen et al. further includes wherein the first shunt capacitor 122 is coupled as a ground bypass between the heater element 120 and the RF filter 124 (Fig. 1).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen et al. (U.S. 2018/0342375) in view of Lin et al. (U.S. 2017/0278682) or Okunishi et al. (U.S. 2018/0309423) as applied to claims 11-18 above, and further in view of Lubomirsky et al. (U.S. 2018/0096865).
The teachings of Nguyen et al. in view of Lin et al. or Okunishi et al. have been discussed above.
Nguyen et al. in view of Lin et al. or Okunishi et al. is silent on wherein the precursor comprises a halogen-containing precursor.
Referring to paragraphs [0038]-[0039], Lubomirsky teach that is conventionally known in the plasma art to use a halogen-contain precursor for an etching process. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention for the precursor of Nguyen et al. in view of Lin et al. or Okunishi et al. to be a halogen-containing precursor as taught by Lubomirsky since it is conventionally used precursor for a plasma etching process.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen et al. (U.S. 2018/0342375) in view of Lin et al. (U.S. 2017/0278682) or Okunishi et al. (U.S. 2018/0309423) as applied to claims 11-18 above, and further in view of Iwata (U.S. 2009/0242134) and Negishi et al. (U.S. 20100025369).
The teachings of Nguyen et al. in view of Lin et al. or Okunishi et al. have been discussed above. Specifically, Nguyen et al. discloses wherein the heater element 130 is disposed within the pedestal proximate a radial edge of the pedestal (Fig. 1).
Nguyen et al. in view of Lin et al. or Okunishi et al. is silent on adjusting the capacitance of the first shunt capacitor in real time while performing a processing operation using the plasma to maintain a plasma height above the radial edge of the pedestal that is less than 40% higher than a plasma height above a central axis of the pedestal.
Referring to paragraphs [0035]-[0036], Nguyen et al. teaches that is conventionally known to adjust the capacitance to achieve etching uniformity. The shunt capacitors 122. 132 are varied using a controller 190 and hence can operate at various ranges to adjusting the capacitance of the shunt capacitor in real time to control the center-to-edge uniformity of the plasma density. Additionally, it is well known in the plasma processing art that it is desired for the plasma density to be lower near the radial edge of the substrate, hence one of ordinary skill in the art would control adjust the capacitance to achieve etching uniformity. More importantly, Nguyen et al. disclose that by varying the capacitance of the shunt capacitors coupled to a heater, plasma conditions are varied (pars. [0031]-[0032],[0035],[0038]). One example of a plasma condition is plasma thickness or plasma height. Thus, Nguyen et al. indicate that the plasma condition (i.e. plasma height) is controlled across the center and edge of the substrate support in order to achieve uniform etching (par.[0031]). Therefore, Nguyen et al. teach the basic concept of adjusting the capacitance of the shunt capacitor coupled to a heater in order to adjust the plasma height to achieve uniform etching.
Referring to paragraph [0013], Iwata teaches that the percentage current supplied to the conductive member can vary by the variable capacitor which will alter the plasma density distribution (i.e. height) across the radial direction of the pedestal. Referring to Figure 8 and paragraphs [0037], [0043], Negishi et al. show that a plasma height above the radial edge of the pedestal that is less than 40% higher than a plasma height above a central axis of the pedestal and this height can be controlled by adjusting the variable capacitor. Hence, the combined teachings of Nguyen et al. in view of Iwata and Negishi et al. would yield adjusting the capacitance of the shunt capacitor in real time while performing a processing operation using the plasma to maintain a plasma height above the radial edge of the pedestal that is less than 40% higher than a plasma height above a central axis of the pedestal. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Nguyen et al. in view of Lin et al. or Okunishi et al. to adjust the capacitance of the first shunt capacitor in real time while performing a processing operation using the plasma to maintain a plasma height above the radial edge of the pedestal that is less than 40% higher than a plasma height above a central axis of the pedestal to achieve the desired etching uniformity. The resulting method would yield adjusting the capacitance of the shunt capacitor in real time while performing a processing operation using the plasma to maintain a plasma height above the radial edge of the pedestal that is less than 40% higher than a plasma height above a central axis of the pedestal.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen et al. (U.S. 2018/0342375) in view of Lin et al. (U.S. 2017/0278682) or Okunishi et al. (U.S. 2018/0309423) as applied to claims 11-18 above, and further in view of Jafarian-Tehrani et al. (U.S. 2019/0035608).
As discussed above, the resulting apparatus of Nguyen et al. in view Lin et al. or Okunishi et al. would yield a heater element electrically coupled with a separate inlet and outlet line, a separate RF filter, separate shunt capacitors connected to the separate inlet and outlet line, and a capacitance controller to modulate the capacitance. Nguyen et al. further includes two heater elements 120, 130 within the pedestal 112 located in radial zones (Fig. 1).
Nguyen et al. in view of Lin et al. or Okunishi et al. is silent on wherein the pedestal further comprises four heater elements.
Referring to Figures 2-3 and paragraphs [0033]-[0034], Jafarian-Tehrani et al. teach that it is conventionally known in the art for a pedestal to have four heater elements in order to control the temperature in difference zones of the pedestal. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the pedestal of Nguyen et al. in view of Lin et al. or Okunishi et al. with four heater elements as taught by Jafarian-Tehrani et al. in order to control the temperature in difference zones of the pedestal. Additionally, mere duplication of parts (i.e. four heater elements) has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. The resulting apparatus of Nguyen et al. in view of (Lin et al. or Okunishi et al.) and Jafarian-Tehrani et al. would yield wherein the pedestal further comprises four heater elements, including the heater element, each individually electrically coupled with separate inlet and outlet lines, a separate RF filter, and separate shunt capacitors connected to the separate inlet and outlet lines, and the method further comprises modulating the capacitance of each of the separate shunt capacitors to tune the plasma envelope within four corresponding radial zones of the pedestal.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 20, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant has argued that nowhere in Lin is there any disclosure or suggestion of a shunt capacitor to ground on either the inlet or outlet line of the heater element, let alone a pair of such capacitors both being controller-adjustable.
However, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In the instant case, Nguyen et al. show all the components of a first shunt capacitor 122 to ground is connected to the inlet line that is coupled between the RF filter 124 and the heater 120 (Fig. 1. par.[0051]), and wherein a capacitance of the shunt capacitor is adjustable by a controller 190 (pars.[0026]-[0035]). As stated above, the shunt capacitors 910, 912 of Lin et al. are grounded via the conductors 904, 906 to the grounded power box 103. Since Lin et al. teaches a heater element configuration using a first shunt capacitor to ground 910 and second shunt capacitor to ground 912, then Lin et al. was simply applied to show that it’s conventionally known in the art to provide Nguyen et al. with a second shunt capacitor to ground to be connected to the outlet line. In other words, Lin et al. was simply applied for a teaching to use a first shunt capacitor and a second shunt capacitor. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would use the same type of variable capacitor that is controllable in Nguyen et al. for the second shunt capacitor to ground to the outlet line in order to further adjust impedance between the heating element and the RF filter. Since, the function of the first and second shunt capacitors to ground would be to adjust impedance between the heating element and the RF filter, then the mere duplication of parts (i.e. second shunt capacitor) has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. Therefore, the method of Nguyen et al. in view of Lin et al. satisfies the claimed requirements.
Nevertheless, applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new reference Okunishi et al.’423 teach a first shunt capacitor to ground connected to the inlet line of the heater element and a second shunt capacitor to ground connected to the outlet line of the heater element.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michelle CROWELL whose telephone number is (571)272-1432. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 10:00am-6:00pm.
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://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Parviz Hassanzadeh can be reached on 571-272-1435. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to 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.
/Michelle CROWELL/Examiner, Art Unit 1716
/SYLVIA MACARTHUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716