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 without traverse of Invention I (claims 1-12) in the reply filed on July 25, 2022 is acknowledged.
Claims 13-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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) 1-4, 6-9, 11-12, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto et al. (U.S. 2009/0255468) in view of Takeda (U.S. 2018/0182601), Matsuura et al. (U.S. 2009/0056877), and Fujii et al. (U.S. 201/0164848).
Referring to Figures 1-2 and paragraphs [0036]-[0060], Yamamoto et al. disclose a substrate processing apparatus comprising: a reaction tube 203 configured to process a plurality of substrates 200 (Fig. 2, par. [0036]); a substrate support 217, 218 configured to support the plurality of substrates 200 stacked in multiple stages (par.[0036]-[0037]); a buffer chamber 237 which is at least located at a position of height from a lowermost substrate to an uppermost substrate supported by the substrate support which is installed along an inner wall of the reaction tube, and in which processing gas is activated by plasma (Fig. 2, par.[0043]); an electrode 269, 270 for plasma generation that is inserted from a lower portion of the buffer chamber into an upper portion of the buffer chamber through a side surface of the reaction tube, the electrode being configured to activate the processing gas inside the buffer chamber to form an activated processing gas by applying high-frequency power to the electrode by a power supply 273 (Fig. 2, pars.[0042]-[0043]); a nozzle 232a configured to supply the processing gas into the buffer chamber (Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
783
686
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Yamamoto et al. is silent on a high-frequency power supply configured to apply high-frequency power having a frequency of 27MHz to the electrode.
Referring to paragraph [0116], Takeda teaches a substrate processing apparatus wherein a high-frequency power supply is configured to apply high-frequency power having a frequency of 28 MHz to the electrode since it is a conventionally known frequency used for plasma generation. Referring to paragraph [0058], Matsuura et al. teaches a substrate processing apparatus wherein a high-frequency power supply is configured to apply high-frequency power having a frequency of 27 MHz to the electrode since it is a conventionally known frequency used for plasma generation. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the apparatus of Yamamoto et al. with a high-frequency power supply that is configured to apply high-frequency power having a frequency of 27 MHz to the electrode as taught by Takeda or Matsuura et al. since it is a conventionally known frequency used for plasma generation. The resulting apparatus of Yamamoto et al. in view of Takeda or Matsuura et al. would yield a high-frequency power supply configured to apply high-frequency power having a frequency of 27MHz to the electrode.
Yamamoto et al. fail to teach heat-insulating plates formed in multiple stages and disposed below the plurality of substrates supported by the substrate support; wherein a bottom surface of the buffer chamber is located at a position at an upper end of the heat-insulating plates such that plasma is prevented from being generated at a standing wave generation region of the lower portion of the buffer chamber when the high-frequency power supply applies the high-frequency power having the frequency of 27 MHz to the electrode.
Referring to Figure 1 below and paragraph [0043], Takeda teach a substrate processing apparatus wherein it is a conventionally known to use heat-insulating plates 218 formed in multiple stages and disposed below the plurality of substrates 200 supported by the substrate support. Referring to Figure 1 below, Fujii et al. show that it is a conventionally known arrangement for a bottom surface of the buffer chamber to be located at a position at an upper end of the heat-insulating plates. This arrangement allows generated plasma to be evenly distributed across the plurality of substrates. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the support of Yamamoto et al. with heat-insulating plates formed in multiple stages and disposed below the plurality of substrates supported by the substrate support; wherein a bottom surface of the buffer chamber is located at a position at an upper end of the heat-insulating plates as taught by Takeda and Fujii et al. since it is an alternate and conventionally known means for supporting the substrate support and the arrangement allows generated plasma to be evenly distributed across the plurality of substrates. The resulting apparatus of Yamamoto et al. in view of Takeda and Fujii et al. would yield heat-insulating plates formed in multiple stages and disposed below the plurality of substrates supported by the substrate support, wherein a bottom surface of the buffer chamber is located at a position at an upper end of the heat-insulating plates. Since the apparatus of Yamamoto et al. in view of Takeda and Fujii et al. teach the structural limitations of “wherein a bottom surface of the buffer chamber is located at a position at an upper end of the heat-insulating plates”, the resulting structure would yield that the plasma is prevented from being generated at a standing wave generation region of the lower portion of the buffer chamber when the high-frequency power supply applies the high-frequency power having the frequency of 27 MHz to the electrode.
With respect to “wherein the lower portion of the buffer chamber is aligned with a position of the lowermost substrate supported by the substrate support 101 in a vertical direction, and the upper portion of the buffer chamber 105 is aligned with a position of the uppermost substrate supported by the substrate support in the vertical direction”, as seen below, Fujii et al. show this limitation in Figure 1.
PNG
media_image2.png
852
890
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
664
559
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 2, the substrate processing apparatus of Yamamoto et al. further includes wherein a gas supply hole 248a for supplying the activated processing gas to a center of the reaction tube is installed at the buffer chamber (Fig. 2, par.[0040]).
With respect to claim 3, the substrate processing apparatus of Yamamoto et al. further includes wherein the electrode includes: a first rod-shaped electrode 270 connected to the power supply 273; and a second rod-shaped electrode 269 connected to a reference potential, and wherein the first rod-shaped electrode and the second rod-shaped electrode are alternately arranged (Figs. 1-2, par.[0042]).
With respect to claim 4, Yamamoto et al. fail to teach wherein the electrode includes: a plurality of first rod-shaped electrodes connected to the power supply; and a second rod-shaped electrode connected to a reference potential, between the plurality of first rod-shaped electrodes.
Referring to Figure 2 and paragraphs [0033], [0116], Takeda teach a substrate processing apparatus wherein the electrode includes: a plurality of first rod-shaped electrodes connected to a high-frequency power supply having a frequency of about 27MHz; and a second rod-shaped electrode connected to a reference potential, between the plurality of first rod-shaped electrodes in order to generate plasma in two regions 224a, 224b. Additionally, referring to paragraph [0058], Matsuura et al. teaches a substrate processing apparatus wherein a high-frequency power supply is configured to apply high-frequency power having a frequency of 27 MHz to an electrode since it is a conventionally known frequency used for plasma generation. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the electrode of Yamamoto et al. such that the electrode includes: a plurality of first rod-shaped electrodes connected to a high-frequency power supply; and a second rod-shaped electrode connected to a reference potential, between the plurality of first rod-shaped electrodes as taught by Takeda and Matsuura et al. since it’s an alternate arrangement for generating plasma that will yield plasma in two regions.
With respect to claim 6, the substrate processing apparatus of Yamamoto et al. further comprising: an electrode protection tube 275 configured to protect the electrode by covering the electrode, wherein the electrode protection tube is inserted from the lower portion of the buffer chamber through the side surface of the reaction tube (Figs. 1-2, par.[0042]).
With respect to claim 7, the substrate processing apparatus of Yamamoto et al. further wherein the electrode protection tube 275 penetrates the side surface of the reaction tube such that a position of the electrode protection tube at an inner side of the reaction tube is higher than a position of the electrode protection tube at an outer side of the reaction tube (Figs. 1-2).
With respect to claim 8, the substrate processing apparatus of Yamamoto et al. further wherein the electrode 269, 271 is inserted into the electrode protection tube 275 that is inserted from the lower portion of the buffer chamber through the side surface of the reaction tube (Figs. 1-2).
With respect to claim 9, the substrate processing apparatus of Yamamoto et al. further comprising: a gas supplier 247 inserted from a bottom surface of the buffer chamber through the side surface of the reaction tube and configured to supply the processing gas into the buffer chamber (Figs. 1-2, pars.[0038]).
With respect to claim 11, the substrate processing apparatus of Yamamoto et al. further comprising: an electrode protection tube 275 configured to protect the electrode 269, 271 by covering the electrode, wherein the electrode protection tube is inserted from a bottom surface of the buffer chamber through the side surface of the reaction tube (Fig. 2, [0042]).
With respect to claim 12, the substrate processing apparatus of Yamamoto et al. further wherein the processing gas is a nitrogen-containing gas (pars.[0062],[0063]).
With respect to claim 15, the substrate processing apparatus of Yamamoto et al. further comprising: an electrode protection tube 275 configured to protect the electrode by covering the electrode 269, 270, wherein the electrode protection tube penetrates the side surface of the reaction tube such that a position of the electrode protection tube at an inner side of the reaction tube is higher than a position of the electrode protection tube at an outer side of the reaction tube (Fig. 2, par.[0042]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 23, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant has argued that neither Yamamoto, Takeda, nor Matsuura do not disclose or suggest the feature that "the lower portion of the buffer chamber is aligned with a position of the lowermost substrate supported by the substrate support in a vertical direction," as recited in amended Claim 1.
However, as explained in detail above, Yamamoto, Takeda, and Matsuura were applied for the teaching of various other features of claim 1. Thus, as seen above in Figure 1, Fujii et al. show the limitation of "the lower portion of the buffer chamber 105 is aligned with a position of the lowermost substrate supported by the substrate support 101 in a vertical direction". Furthermore, 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). Therefore, the apparatus of Yamamoto et al. in view of Takeda, Matsuura et al., and Fujii et al. satisfies the claimed requirements.
Applicant has argued that Fujii does not impose any restrictions regarding the position of the plasma space 105 or the insulating plate located at the lower part of the wafer boat 101, nor does it include any description regarding their positions.
However, support for the claimed limitation is shown in both the description and the drawings. In paragraph [0012], Fujii et al. describe the buffer chamber 105 and Figure 1 shows the positional relationship between the buffer chamber 105 and the substrate support 101. As broadly claimed, as long as the lower portion of the buffer chamber 105 is positioned near and corresponds to the lowermost substrate supported by the substrate support 101 and the upper portion of the buffer chamber 105 is positioned near and corresponds to the uppermost substrate supported by the substrate support 101, then Fujii et al. meets the claimed limitation. In fact, in applicant’s own Figure 7, the lower portion, not lowest portion, of the buffer chamber 237 is aligned with the lowermost wafer 200b. Moreover, the claim fails to require wherein the lowest portion of the buffer chamber is aligned with a position of the lowermost substrate supported by the substrate support in a vertical direction, and the uppermost portion of the buffer chamber is aligned with a position of the uppermost substrate supported by the substrate support in the vertical direction. Therefore, since Fujii et al. show wherein the lower portion of the buffer chamber is aligned with a position of the lowermost substrate supported by the substrate support in a vertical direction, and the upper portion of the buffer chamber is aligned with a position of the uppermost substrate supported by the substrate support in the vertical direction, then the apparatus of Yamamoto et al. in view of Takeda, Matsuura et al., and Fujii et al. satisfies the claimed requirements.
Applicant has argued that in Fig. 1 of Fujii, the uppermost of the micro holes in the plasma space 105 is depicted as being lower than the uppermost wafer, and the lowermost micro hole is depicted as being higher than the lowermost wafer. Consequently, radicalized NH3 gas cannot be directly supplied to the uppermost and lowermost wafers. Considering this, a person of ordinary skill in the art would not expect, even with reference to Fujii, that the plasma space 105 would be implemented as shown in Fig. 1 to be vertically aligned with the uppermost and lowermost wafers. Therefore, Fig. 1 of Fujii cannot be considered to have reasonably disclosed the technical details of the relative position or arrangement between the plasma space 105 and the wafer boat 101.
However, as stated in the paragraph above, the claimed structure simply requires that the lower portion of the buffer chamber is aligned with a position of the lowermost substrate supported by the substrate support in a vertical direction, and the upper portion of the buffer chamber is aligned with a position of the uppermost substrate supported by the substrate support in the vertical direction which is seen above in Figure 1 of Fujii et al. It is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., the uppermost of the micro holes in the plasma space (i.e. buffer chamber) is at a position of the uppermost wafer, and the lowermost micro hole in the plasma space (i.e. buffer chamber) is at a position of the lowermost wafer. Hence, plasma gas can be directly supplied to the uppermost and lowermost wafers.) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Additionally, paragraph [0012] of Fujii et al. indicates that the micro holes are not shown so Fujii et al. provides more holes to evenly distribute the plasma gas from the buffer chamber 105 across the all of the wafers. Nevertheless, the basic nature of gases are to expand to fill an enclosed space and hence the plasma gases will expand to treat the entire substrate support within the enclosed treatment area. Therefore, since Fujii et al. show wherein the lower portion of the buffer chamber is aligned with a position of the lowermost substrate supported by the substrate support in a vertical direction, and the upper portion of the buffer chamber is aligned with a position of the uppermost substrate supported by the substrate support in the vertical direction, then the apparatus of Yamamoto et al. in view of Takeda, Matsuura et al., and Fujii et al. satisfies the claimed requirements.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 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 published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, 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