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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C.
102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the
statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art
relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Elections/Restrictions
Status of Claims
Claims 1-13 and 16-22 are pending.
Claims 1 and 16 has been amended.
Claims 8-13 are withdrawn.
Claims 14-15 have been cancelled.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claims 5-7: “movable member” which is characterized as screws 1020 in the applicant’s specification [0050].
Claims 16-18: “movable member” which is characterized as screws 1020 in the applicant’s specification [0050].
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 20140252134) in view of Glukhoy (US 20150214009), with Hong et al. (US 20150284847), Wang et al. (US 20170101713), and Tam et al. (US 20090095221) as evidentiary references.
Regarding Claim 1:
Chen teaches a semiconductor processing chamber comprising: a chamber body (body of chamber system 200) defining a processing volume (substrate processing region 233); a pedestal (substrate support 265) disposed at least partly within the processing volume;
and a faceplate assembly (showerhead 225) coupled to the chamber body above the pedestal in the processing volume, the faceplate assembly comprising: a plurality of interchangeable thermal bodies (channels 517), wherein each of the plurality of interchangeable thermal bodies comprises a plug (as evidenced by Fig. 5, inserts 515 are plugs in faceplate 500), the faceplate assembly comprising: at least one surface defining a plurality of voids (the space where inserts 515 are disposed), each void configured to receive an interchangeable thermal body (as evidenced by Fig. 5, inserts 515 occupy a space in face plate 500) of the plurality of interchangeable thermal bodies; wherein each of the plurality of interchangeable thermal bodies is engaged with one of the plurality of voids (as evidenced by Fig. 5, inserts 515 occupy a space in face plate 500) [Fig. 2A, 5 & 0033, 0034, 0040, 0050-0052].
Chen does not specifically disclose wherein at least two of the plurality of interchangeable thermal bodies comprise different thermal masses. However, Chen does disclose that the inserts 515 may be made of a variety of materials that include dielectrics, insulative materials, oxides, and ceramics or other inorganic or organic nonmetallic solids [Fig. 5 & 0050].
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the thermal bodies (inserts) of Chen to either be made of the same materials, or different materials, because the materials listed are all suitable materials for thermal bodies [Fig. 5 & 0050]. It has been held that selecting a known material on the basis of suitability for the intended use involves only routine skill in the art [MPEP 2144.07].
Modified Chen does not specifically disclose the plurality of voids are arranged in a plurality of concentric zones; at least two zones of the plurality of concentric zones comprise interchangeable thermal bodies having different thermal masses.
Glukhoy teaches the plurality of voids are arranged in a plurality of concentric zones (the gas holes 38a, 38b, . . . 38p of the showerhead 20 are arranged in a pattern of concentric circles) [Fig. 5 & 0015].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the gas box of Modified Chen to arrange the voids in concentric zones, as in Glukhoy, to provide concentric and radial gas uniformity [Glukhoy - 0015]. It is noted that utilizing concentric patterns for gas inlets in a showerhead is a very well-known technique in the art, as evidenced by Hong et al. (US 20150284847), Wang et al. (US 20170101713), and Tam et al. (US 20090095221) [Hong - 0061-0062; Wang - 0038; Tam - 0078]. It is further noted that the combination of references would disclose "at least two zones of the plurality of concentric zones comprise interchangeable thermal bodies having different thermal masses." The inserts 515 essentially constitute the gas inlets of the face plate 500 of Chen. As such, arranging those inserts in concentric zones (such as in Glukhoy) would result in at least two zones comprising interchangeable thermal bodies.
Furthermore, the limitations “the at least two interchangeable thermal bodies being selected and arranged to control a thermal distribution within the chamber body,” are merely intended use and are given weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the intended use. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). It is noted that the instant application utilizes the changing of materials as one way to change thermal distribution [IA – 0043 - 0050]. As such, since Chen discloses that a plurality of different materials can be used for the inserts 515, the combination of references would disclose an apparatus that is capable of changing thermal distribution. Furthermore, Chen discloses that the inserts may be disposed in the apertures in a variety of ways including press fitting, thermal shrinking, or with other clamping and fitting mechanisms as would be understood. For example, one or more devices 523 such as o-rings may be positioned along the inserts to provide a sealing between the plate 520 and the inserts 515. The addition of other components, such as o-rings, with the inserts would itself change the thermal characteristics of a physical structure. Chen also discloses multiple sizes for the inserts 515; changing the size of an insert would change its effect on the thermal distribution of a face plate [Chen – 0052-0053].
Regarding Claim 2:
Chen does not specifically disclose wherein the interchangeable thermal body has a specific thermal emissivity selected from a plurality of plugs having varied thermal emissivities. However, Chen does disclose that the inserts 515 may be made of a variety of materials that include dielectrics, insulative materials, oxides, and ceramics or other inorganic or organic nonmetallic solids [Fig. 2A, 5 & 0050-0052].
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the thermal bodies (inserts) of Chen to either be made of the same materials, or different materials, because the materials listed are all suitable materials for thermal bodies [Fig. 5 & 0050]. It has been held that selecting a known material on the basis of suitability for the intended use involves only routine skill in the art [MPEP 2144.07].
Regarding Claim 3:
Chen does not specifically wherein the interchangeable thermal body has a specific thermal mass selected from a plurality of plugs having varied thermal masses. However, Chen does disclose that the inserts 515 may be made of a variety of materials that include dielectrics, insulative materials, oxides, and ceramics or other inorganic or organic nonmetallic solids [Fig. 2A, 5 & 0050-0052].
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the thermal bodies (inserts) of Chen to either be made of the same materials, or different materials, because the materials listed are all suitable materials for thermal bodies [Fig. 5 & 0050]. It has been held that selecting a known material on the basis of suitability for the intended use involves only routine skill in the art [MPEP 2144.07].
Regarding Claim 4:
Chen teaches the interchangeable thermal body comprises a thermal contact (body of inserts 515) [Fig. 2A, 5 & 0050].
Regarding Claim 21:
Chen teaches wherein: each of the plurality of interchangeable thermal bodies defines a plurality of outlet apertures that extend through a thickness of the respective thermal body (as evidenced by Fig. 5, apertures 565 extend through a thickness of inserts 515) [Fig. 5 & 0050].
Claim(s) 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 20140252134) in view of Glukhoy (US 20150214009), with Hong et al. (US 20150284847), Wang et al. (US 20170101713), and Tam et al. (US 20090095221) as evidentiary references, applied to claims 1-4 and 21 above, and further in view of Hytros et al. (US 20030124842), Tan et al. (US 20170338133), Chandrasekharan et al. (US 9490149), Williamson (US 4766960), and Powell (US 3501810), with Bianchi (US 4615354) and Tsutsumi (US 5246660) as evidentiary references.
The limitations of Claims 1-4 and 21 have been set forth above.
Regarding Claim 5:
Chen teaches a gas box (cooling plate 203 and face plate 217) disposed above the faceplate and the pedestal [Fig. 2A, 5 & 0050].
Chen does not specifically disclose the gas box comprising: an upper plate defining a plurality of delivery ports.
Hytros teaches the gas box (gas box 132) comprising: an upper plate (top half of center plate 149) defining a plurality of delivery ports (first gas input 134 and second gas input 140) [Fig. 3 & 0024].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the gas box of Chen to have an upper plate with delivery ports, as in Hytros, to allow a structure to hold a heat transfer fluid, allowing for temperature control; temperature control may be used to prevent deposition or condensation on unwanted regions [Hytros - 0025]. Furthermore, the gas box of Chen comprises a cooling plate 203; heat transfer fluid cooling, as depicted by Hytros, is a suitable method for a cooling system.
Modified Chen (Chen further modified by Hytros) does not specifically disclose a lower plate defining a gas flow path.
Tan teaches a lower plate (second gas box plate 149) defining a gas flow path (gas flow paths defined by plurality of channels 845) [Fig. 8-10 & 0071].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the gas box of Modified Chen to have a lower plate defining a gas flow path, as in Tan, to provide uniform gas dispersion [Tan - 0072].
Modified Chen (Chen further modified by Hytros and Tan) does not specifically disclose a plurality of movable members, each movable member configured to engage a delivery port of the plurality of delivery ports, each movable member being movable to provide flow control for a gas being delivered to the semiconductor processing chamber through the gas flow path.
Chandrasekharan teaches a plurality of movable members (spherical bodies 350), each movable member configured to engage a delivery port (opening 340) of the plurality of delivery ports, each movable member being movable to provide flow control for a gas being delivered to the semiconductor processing chamber through the gas flow path (the spherical bodies 350 can block flow exceeding certain pressures, and they can float to allow flow at acceptable pressures) [Fig. 2, 3 & Col. 8 lines 1-35, Col. 9 lines 9-13].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the gas box of Modified Chen to include a plurality of movable members, as in Chandrasekharan, to provide control over gas flow and conductance, and to help regulate pressure [Chandrasekharan '149 - Col. 6 lines 51-67, Col. 7 lines 1-12].
Modified Chen (Chen further modified by Hytros, Tan, and Chandrasekharan) does not specifically disclose wherein the plurality of movable members comprises a plurality of screws.
Powell teaches wherein the plurality of movable members (extrusion screw 26) comprises a plurality of screws [Col. 2 lines 40-53].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the moveable members of Modified Chen to comprise adjustable screws, as in Powell, to provide further control over pressure and flow [Powell - Col. 2 lines 53-64, Col. 3 lines 45-64]. Tsutsumi (US 5246660) also discloses that screw valves and ball valves can be interchangeable [Tsutsumi - Col. 5 lines 1-5].
Additionally/alternatively, Williamson teaches wherein the plurality of movable members comprises a plurality of screws (the check valve ball 15a may have an adjusting screw 15b to compress spring 15c more or less) [Fig. 3 & Col. 3 lines 15-16].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the moveable members of Modified Chen to comprise screws, as in Williamson, to provide adjustment capabilities [Williamson - Col. 3 lines 15-16]. It is noted that the plurality of conductance control assemblies 300 of Chandrasekharan can be a gravity based mechanical check valve, for example, a spring loaded ball valve [Chandrasekharan - Col. 9 lines 9-13]. Bianchi (US 4615354) also discloses using screws to adjust a spring ball valve [Bianchi - Col. 5 lines 19-27]. Furthermore, although taught by the cited prior art, the limitation “each movable member being movable to provide flow control for a gas being delivered to the semiconductor processing chamber through the gas flow path” is merely intended use and are given weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the intended use. A claim containing “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987).
Regarding Claim 6:
Chen does not specifically disclose the upper plate further defines a recessed channel, and the gas box further comprises: a top cover coextensive with the recessed channel; and a removable bottom cover at least coextensive with the plurality of access ports.
Hytros teaches the upper plate (top half of center plate 149) further defines a recessed channel (temperature fluid control channel 146) [Fig. 3 & 0025], and the gas box (gas box 132) further comprises: a top cover (top plate 148) coextensive with the recessed channel (top plate 148 is coextensive with channel 146, as evidenced by Fig. 3) [Hytros - Fig. 3 & 0026]; and a removable bottom cover (bottom plate 150) at least coextensive with the plurality of access ports (mounting holes 208) [Fig. 7 & 0033].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the gas box of Modified Chen to have an upper plate with a recessed channel and a cover, as in Hytros, to allow a structure to hold a heat transfer fluid, allowing for temperature control; temperature control may be used to prevent deposition or condensation on unwanted regions [Hytros - 0025].Modified Chen (Chen further modified by Hytros and Tan) does not specifically disclose the lower plate further defines a plurality of access ports for the plurality of movable members.
Modified Chen (Chen further modified by Hytros and Tan) does not specifically disclose wherein the lower plate further defines a plurality of access ports for the plurality of movable members,
Chandrasekharan teaches wherein the lower plate further defines a plurality of access ports (conical portion 332) for the plurality of movable members [Fig. 2, 3 & Col. 8 lines 1-35, Col. 9 lines 9-13].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the gas box of Modified Chen to include a plurality of movable members, as in Chandrasekharan, to provide control over gas flow and conductance, and to help regulate pressure [Chandrasekharan '149 - Col. 6 lines 51-67, Col. 7 lines 1-12].
Regarding Claim 7:
Modified Chen (Chen further modified by Hytros, Tan, and Chandrasekharan) does not specifically disclose the plurality of movable members comprises a plurality of screws accessible through a plurality of access ports further defined by the lower plate.
Powell teaches wherein the plurality of movable members comprises a plurality of screws (extrusion screw 26) accessible through a plurality of access ports (chamber 32) further defined by the lower plate [Col. 2 lines 40-53].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the moveable members of Modified Chen to comprise adjustable screws, as in Powell, to provide further control over pressure and flow [Powell - Col. 2 lines 53-64, Col. 3 lines 45-64]. Tsutsumi (US 5246660) also discloses that screw valves and ball valves can be interchangeable [Tsutsumi - Col. 5 lines 1-5].
Claim(s) 16, 18, 20, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chandrasekharan et al. (US 20170101710) in view of Tsutsumi (US 5246660), with Williamson et al. (US 4766960) and Powell (US 3501810) as evidentiary references.
Regarding Claim 16:
Chandrasekharan teaches a semiconductor processing chamber gas box (gas based sealing system 300; FIG. 6 is a cross-sectional view of a portion of the deposition chamber 120 of a chemical deposition apparatus 100 with a gas based sealing system 300 in accordance with an exemplary embodiment) comprising: an upper plate (upper plate 310) having an upper surface (upper surface of upper plate 310) and a lower surface (lower surface of plate 310), wherein: the upper plate defines a central aperture (central aperture where process gases 192 flow through) extending from the upper surface to the lower surface [Fig. 1B, 6 & 0026, 0048]; the upper plate defines a delivery channel (annular recess 314) that extends partially through a thickness of the upper plate [Fig. 1B, 6 & 0051]; the delivery channel is radially outward of the central aperture (as evidenced by Fig. 1B and 6, annular recess 314 is radially outward of the central aperture where process gases 192 flow through) [Fig. 1B, 6 & 0026, 0048, 0051]; the upper plate defines a plurality of delivery ports (one or more conduits 312) that extend between the delivery channel and the lower surface (as evidenced by Fig. 6, the one or more conduits 312 extend from an upper surface of upper plate 310 to a lower surface of upper plate 310) [Fig. 1B, 6 & 0051]; a lower plate (backing plate 139) defining as gas flow path divided into a plurality of independently controllable zones (one or more conduits 322), each zone fluidly coupled with the delivery channel (annular recess 314) via at least one of the plurality of delivery ports (the one or more conduits 322 are fluidly coupled with the annular recess 314, as evidenced by Fig. 6) [Fig. 1B, 6 & 0050].
PNG
media_image1.png
594
838
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Chandrasekharan does not specifically disclose a plurality of movable members, each movable member configured to engage a delivery port of the plurality of delivery ports, each movable member being independently movable to a fixed axial position relative to the upper plate.
Tsutsumi teaches a movable member (screw plunger 3), the movable member configured to engage a delivery port (forward special portion 2a) each movable member being independently movable to a fixed axial position relative to the upper plate (melt filtering means 60; the screw plunger 3 is movable so as to allow melt to pass through) [Fig. 1, 5 & Col. 12 lines 19-22, 40-56, Col. 16 lines 61-68].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the delivery ports of Modified Chandrasekharan to include moveable members, as in Tsutsumi, to provide further control over fluid flows and prevent backflow [Tsutsumi - Col. 12 lines 1-11, 40-56]. It is noted that utilizing check valves for a fluid inlet is a very well-known technique in the art, as evidenced by Williamson et al. (US 4766960) and Powell (US 3501810) [Williamson - Col. 3 lines 20-24; Powell - Col. 2 lines 40-53].
Furthermore, the limitation “wherein the fixed axial position controls a flow of a gas being delivered through the delivery port,” is merely intended use and are given weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the intended use. A claim containing “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). It is noted that modifying the delivery ports of Chandrasekharan to include moveable members would result in that moveable member changing gas flow due to its presence.
Regarding Claim 18:
Chandrasekharan ‘710 does not specifically disclose wherein the plurality of movable members comprises a plurality of screws accessible through a plurality of access ports further defined by the lower plate.
Powell teaches wherein the plurality of movable members comprises a plurality of screws (extrusion screw 26) accessible through a plurality of access ports (chamber 32) further defined by the lower plate [Col. 2 lines 40-53].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the moveable members of Modified Chandrasekharan '710 to comprise adjustable screws, as in Powell, to provide further control over pressure and flow [Powell - Col. 2 lines 53-64, Col. 3 lines 45-64]. Tsutsumi (US 5246660) also discloses that screw valves and ball valves can be interchangeable [Tsutsumi - Col. 5 lines 1-5].
Regarding Claim 20:
Chandrasekharan ‘710 teaches wherein the gas flow path comprises a plurality of gas flow paths (the vertical gas passage 370 includes one or more conduits 312, 322) and further wherein at least one of the plurality of gas flow paths includes or is fluidly connected to a delivery channel (the conduits 322 are fluidly connected to inner channel 360) (the one or more conduits 322 are fluidly coupled with the annular recess 314, as evidenced by Fig. 6) [Fig. 1B, 6 & 0050].
Regarding Claim 22:
Chandrasekharan ‘710 does not specifically disclose wherein: each delivery port of the plurality of delivery ports defines a fluid flow path through the lower plate; and engagement of each movable member with a respective delivery port of the plurality of delivery ports comprises inserting the moveable member into the respective delivery port.
Powell teaches wherein: each delivery port (the passage between screw cylinder 24 and extrusion screw 26, and the passageways 31 and 33) of the plurality of delivery ports defines a fluid flow path through the lower plate; and engagement of each movable member with a respective delivery port of the plurality of delivery ports comprises inserting the moveable member into the respective delivery port (as evidenced by Figs. 1-3, the extrusion screw 26 is inserted within screw cylinder 24 and passageways 31 and 33) [Fig. 1-3 & Col. 2 lines 40-64].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the moveable members of Modified Chandrasekharan '710 to comprise adjustable screws, as in Powell, to provide further control over pressure and flow [Powell - Col. 2 lines 53-64, Col. 3 lines 45-64]. Tsutsumi (US 5246660) also discloses that screw valves and ball valves can be interchangeable [Tsutsumi - Col. 5 lines 1-5].
Claim(s) 17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chandrasekharan et al. (US 20170101710) in view of Tsutsumi (US 5246660), with Williamson et al. (US 4766960) and Powell (US 3501810) as evidentiary references, as applied to claims 16, 18, 20, and 22, above, and further in view of Hytros et al. (US 20030124842).
The limitations of claims 16 and 18 have been set forth above.
Regarding Claim 17:
Modified Chandrasekharan ‘710 teaches wherein the lower plate further defines a plurality of access ports (conical portion 332) for the plurality of movable members [Chandrasekharan ‘149 - Fig. 2, 3 & Col. 8 lines 1-35, Col. 9 lines 9-13].
Modified Chandrasekharan ‘710 does not specifically disclose the semiconductor processing chamber gas box further comprises a removable bottom cover at least coextensive with the plurality of access ports.
Hytros teaches the semiconductor processing chamber gas box (gas box 132) further comprises a removable bottom cover (bottom plate 150) at least coextensive with the plurality of access ports (mounting holes 208) [Fig. 7 & 0033].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the gas box of Modified Chandrasekharan '710 to have a bottom cover, as in Hytros, to enclose a flow path, thereby allowing the delivery of substantially uniform flow of gas [Hytros & 0027].
Regarding Claim 19:
Modified Chandrasekharan ‘710 does not specifically disclose and the semiconductor processing chamber gas box further comprises a top cover coextensive with the recessed channel, and the semiconductor processing chamber gas box further comprises a top cover coextensive with the recessed channel.
Hytros teaches the semiconductor processing chamber gas box (gas box 132) further comprises a top cover (top plate 148) coextensive with the recessed channel (top plate 148 is coextensive with channel 146, as evidenced by Fig. 3) [Fig. 3 & 0026] and the semiconductor processing chamber gas box (gas box 132) further comprises a top cover (top plate 148) coextensive with the recessed channel (top plate 148 is coextensive with channel 146, as evidenced by Fig. 3) [Fig. 3 & 0026];
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the gas box of Modified Chandrasekharan '710 to have an upper plate with a recessed channel and a cover, as in Hytros, to allow a structure to hold a heat transfer fluid, allowing for temperature control; temperature control may be used to prevent deposition or condensation on unwanted regions [Hytros - 0025].
Response to Arguments
Applicant' s arguments, see Remarks, filed 02/23/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-7 and 16-22 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the combination of references does not specifically disclose “the plurality of voids are arranged in a plurality of concentric zones; at least two zones of the plurality of concentric zones comprise interchangeable thermal bodies having different thermal masses.” However, this argument is now moot because it does not apply to the combination of references being used in the current rejection. The teachings of Glukhoy (US 20150214009), Hong et al. (US 20150284847), Wang et al. (US 20170101713), and Tam et al. (US 20090095221) remedy anything lacking in the combination of references as applied above the top amended claims.
Applicant argues that the combination of references does not specifically disclose “and a plurality of movable members, each movable member configured to engage a delivery port of the plurality of delivery ports, each movable member being independently movable to a fixed axial position relative to the upper plate, wherein the fixed axial position controls a flow of a gas being delivered through the delivery port.” In response, the examiner has utilized the teachings of Tsutsumi (US 5246660) to disclose this limitation.
Tsutsumi teaches a movable member (screw plunger 3), the movable member configured to engage a delivery port (forward special portion 2a) each movable member being independently movable to a fixed axial position relative to the upper plate (melt filtering means 60; the screw plunger 3 is movable so as to allow melt to pass through) [Fig. 1, 5 & Col. 12 lines 19-22, 40-56, Col. 16 lines 61-68].
It is further noted that the screw plunger 3 of Tsutsumi is threaded and a screw, and is capable of switching between open and closed positions [Tsutsumi – Col. 12 lines 40-63, Col. 16 lines 5-9]. As such, the screw plunger 3 is capable of being fixed in place to direct fluid flow as recited by the claim limitations.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the delivery ports of Modified Chandrasekharan to include moveable members, as in Tsutsumi, to provide further control over fluid flows and prevent backflow [Tsutsumi - Col. 12 lines 1-11, 40-56]. It is noted that utilizing check valves for a fluid inlet is a very well-known technique in the art, as evidenced by Williamson et al. (US 4766960) and Powell (US 3501810) [Williamson - Col. 3 lines 20-24; Powell - Col. 2 lines 40-53].
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 JOSHUA NATHANIEL PINEDA REYES whose telephone number is (571)272-4693. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM to 4:30 PM.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at (571) 272-5166. 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.
/J.R./Examiner, Art Unit 1718
/GORDON BALDWIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Prosecution Insights