DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on (01/13/2021), is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
A restriction requirement was made m this application on 6/16/2022. The restriction was made between apparatus claims 1-13 and method claims 14-17. In response, the Applicant elected apparatus claims 1-13 for prosecution on 7/6/2022. Claims 15-17 were withdrawn. A second restriction requirement was made on 1/9/2023 since the application contained several patentably distinct species. In the response dated 2/24/2023, the Applicant elected claims 1-4 without traverse. Claims 5-17 were withdrawn from consideration.
Claims 1-4 were examined in a first Non-Final on 3/22/2023. In response, applicant submitted on 6/22/2023 an amendment, where claims 3-17 were cancelled and claims 18-25 were added. Therefore claims 1-2 and 18-25 were examined in a first Final office action on 8/22/2023.
A second Non-Final office action in response to a request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114 was mailed on 8/27/2024. Claims 1-2 and 18-26 were examined. A second Final office action in response to a submission dated 11/26/2024 was mailed on 3/20/2025. Claims 1-2 and 18-25 were examined.
A third Non-Final office action in response to a request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114 was mailed on 8/12/2025. Claims 1-2 and 18-25 were examined. A third Final office action in response to a submission dated 11/11/2025 was mailed on 1/29/2026. Claims 1-2, 18-25 and 27 were examined.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 3/30/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-2, 18-22, 24-25 and 27 are being examined.
Response to Amendment and arguments
Applicants’ arguments on the basis of Fig 16 of Hirose are not persuasive since the detection of abnormality in that section is according to fifth embodiment and is specific to that embodiment and may not be applicable to all the other embodiments and does not limit the capability to control sampling for integration during the range of time, cycle and process determined by the user. The latest amendment is fully disclosed by Hirose as discussed below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 1-2, 18-22, 24-25 and 27are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirose et al (US 20200299841) in view of Deo Shinichi et al (JP 2011-052279).
Hirose et al disclose a substrate treatment apparatus (Fig 2), comprising:
a radio frequency power supply device (18 and 17);
an output device comprising a radio frequency (RF) sensor (Para 3);
a controller (1 and 20);
wherein the controller, for every cycle of an atomic layer deposition (ALD) process comprising a plurality of cycles (Fig 16), is configured to:
command the radio frequency power supply device to output a radio frequency power through the output device to a shower head in accordance with a substrate treatment (Para 34),
receive from the RF sensor output signals on which magnitudes of a traveling wave power and a reflected wave power of the radio frequency power are reflected as the plasma-related signal (signals as in abstract, para 43, 45, 49-56). Specially para 56-58 discloses travelling wave and reflected wave detection;
periodically integrating the reflected wave power over a time period to form an integrated value of the reflected wave power (Para 58, 63, 68);
integrate the reflected wave power over the cycle of the ALD process to give an integrated value of the reflected wave power for the cycle (Fig 16, 17);
periodically integrating the traveling wave power over the time period to form an integrated value of the traveling wave power (Para 58, 63, 68);
Fig 9 discloses maximum and minimum values of forward and reflected powers and compares them with a threshold to detect abnormality. In para 58 is disclosed integrated values of forward and reflected power. In para 120-128 is disclosed abnormality detection using integrated values of forward and reflected power.
The controller is configured to monitor the whole processor, and determines a sum of reflected power for all cycles Hirose (Para 125).
It is noted that the abnormality is affected mostly with reflected power and is represented in a ratio of reflected to forward power. Hirose discloses the ratio of integrated forward power to reflected power in Fig 17. (Hashed area represents reflected power corresponding to forward power) Regarding the limitation of sum of travelling power and reflected power, this is interpreted as the total power from the source according to the explanation in Para 32 of the specification pub.
Deo Shinichi et al more explicitly disclose ratio of reflected power and forward power a plasma substrate treatment apparatus (Fig 1, 60 and abstract), comprising:
a radio frequency power supply device (1);
an output device comprising a radio frequency (RF) sensor (Fig 1, 2);
a controller is implied since integrating, generating ratio and comparing is disclosed.; Fig 7 discloses detection of travelling wave (29) reflected wave (30), integrator group (43) and divider (44) to calculate the ratio of the integrated value of reflected power to integrated value of traveling wave. This ratio is compared to a setpoint in comparator 45 to determine abnormal discharge.
Regarding the limitation “determine a sum of integrated values of the reflected wave power for all cycles of a substrate treatment of one substrate” added as an amendment it is noted that Hirose et al teaches that sampling for integration of reflected and travelling wave (Para 91) could start from START command and continue until STOP command and can be across several cycles as shown in Fig 10. Hirose are very specific in teaching as below:
In addition, the MC 20 determines the presence or absence of an abnormality in the RF power supply 18 in one process by summing up the integrated values of each cycle of ALD. Meanwhile, the calculated integrated values of one cycle of the ALD are accumulated in the accumulation register 44, and the MC 20 collects the integrated values accumulated in the accumulation register 44 and calculates the integrated values of one process. (Para 125 underlined for emphasis)
Regarding the comparison with threshold to determine abnormality, this was discussed above. It is also noted that to one of ordinary skill in the art, the ratio Pr/Pf could provide any other ratio involving Pr and Pf . The apparatus disclosed above is fully capable of that.
It is noted that large reflected power may be a problem but the ratio of reflected power to traveling power gives a more meaningful assessment of problem. Therefore, doing a comparison of a ratio of integrated reflected power to integrated traveling power in Hirose et al to determine plasma discharge status would have been obvious.
Regarding claim 2 Hirose et al discloses detection of analog signals but digitizing them as disclosed more explicitly in (para 59, 90, 106, 114 and 121).
Regarding claim 18 and 20 chamber and showerhead are disclosed in (Hirose -Fig 2). Gas supply from a slit of shower head is known to be disclosed.
Regarding claim 19 stage to hold a substrate is disclosed in (Hirose -Fig 2) and (Shinichi Fig 1).
Regarding claim 21 termination of process in case of abnormality determination is disclosed in Hirose (Para 86-87, 99-101). It is also noted that determination of abnormality is itself an alarm. An alarm to annunciate an abnormal condition was known in the prior art.
Regarding claim 23, the controller is configured to monitor the whole processor, therefore it effectively determines a sum of reflected power for all cycles Hirose (Para 125). This is also evident from Fig 9.
Regarding claims 24-25, feedback control is disclosed in Hirose (Para 40, 53 and 81).
Regarding claim 27 Hirose discloses integration for all cycles in Fig 17 (See equation in Para 125).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Van Zyl et al (US 20140239813) discloses plasma generation system for plasma processing chamber (Fig 8) and discloses monitoring a characteristic of a plasma processing system (Para 07) to compare to a limit. The characteristics could be reflected power (Para 0039 or 0073). The monitored characteristics could be an integrated value (Para 48-49). The comparison could be in hardware or software (Para 0049 and Fig 10). Monitored characteristics could be forward power or reflected power (Para 0042). It is noted that both Kikuchi and Van Zyl disclose sensing forward power and reflected power and Van Zyl discloses integrating the output of the sensor. Regarding ratio of reflected power to forward power, this would be represented by a reflection coefficient. Van Zyl disclosed keeping it low (Para 35). Also, Fig 9 discloses applying filter to monitor characteristic which is disclosed to be realized by integration.
Roland Schlierf (20170345618) discloses monitoring forward power, reflected power and their ratios in order to control the power supply to improve matching and reduce reflected power (Fig 1 160 and para 100). Roland Schlierf states further that the plasma process may be stopped if the tuning fails which means that the reflected power remains high consistently (Para 0039).
Thompson et al (20010045427) also discloses (Fig 3A 3B and Para 2) monitoring forward power, reflected power and their ratios in order to control the power supply to improve matching and reduce reflected power (Fig 3B, Para 14 and 61).
Kaufman et al (20160169950) disclose an alarm explicitly to indicate reflected power being more than the threshold (Para 0056). Kaufman et al teaches that this helps to prevent equipment failure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAM N KACKAR whose telephone number is (571)272-1436. The examiner can normally be reached 09:00 AM-05:00 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, Parviz Hassanzadeh can be reached at 5712721435. 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.
RAM N. KACKAR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1716
/RAM N KACKAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights