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.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending
Claims 5, 7-8, 12, and 14-20 have been withdrawn
Claims 1-2 and 9 have been amended
Response to Arguments
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has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to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 02/19/2026 has been entered.
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin et al. (US 20190341275) in view of de la Llera et al. (US 8573152), Benzing et al. (US 20020170881), and Dhindsa et al. (US 6391787), with Dhindsa et al. (US 20100040768), Kennedy et al. (US 20050133160), Szapucki et al. (US 6050216), Chen et al. (US 20200051792), Bise et al. (US 20130126486), Chen et al. (US 20150099365), Choi et al. (US 20080302303), Seo et al. (US 20110203735), Wang et al. (US 20190371581), and Godyak et al. (US 20120160806) as evidentiary references.
Regarding Claim 1:
Jin teaches an apparatus for processing substrates, comprising: a process chamber (processing chamber 200) with a process volume located above a substrate support assembly (substrate support 204) surrounded by an edge ring (edge ring 244 that interfaces with a conductance liner (confinement shroud 248); wherein the edge ring is supported by the substrate support assembly on a lower surface of the edge ring (as evidenced by Fig. 2, the edge ring 244 is supported by the substrate support 204); an upper electrode (inner electrode 220) located above the process volume; and a conductive tuning ring (outer electrode 224) surrounding the upper electrode and in electrical contact with the upper electrode (outer electrode 224 and inner electrode 220 are collectively the upper electrode 216), wherein the conductive tuning ring is a unitary structure (as evidenced by Fig. 2, the outer electrode 120 is non comprised of multiple parts, and is instead a single, unitary structure), wherein the conductive tuning ring is positioned directly above the edge ring (as evidenced by Fig. 4, outer electrode 224 is directly above edge ring 244) and wherein the conductive tuning ring has at least one gas port on a lower surface (outer electrode 224 comprises side tuning holes 284), wherein an inner edge of the conductive tuning ring interfaces with the upper electrode (as evidenced by Fig. 2, outer electrode 224 has an inner edge that interfaces with inner electrode 220), a non-stepped portion at an outer periphery of the lower surface of the conductive tuning ring that is positioned directly above the edge ring (as evidenced by Fig. 2, the outer electrode 224 has at least a portion that is not stepped and is located directly above edge ring 244) [Fig. 2 & 0037, 0039, 0040-0041, 0053].
Jin does not specifically disclose a conductive tuning ring surrounds and interlocks with and retains the upper electrode in position, wherein the conductive tuning ring is in direct contact with a backing plate on an upper surface, wherein the backing plate extends behind the upper electrode and the conductive tuning ring.
De la Llera teaches wherein the conductive tuning ring (outer electrode 130) surrounds and interlocks with and retains the upper electrode (inner electrode 120) in position (outer electrode member 24 and inner electrode member are shaped to interlock with each other),
wherein the conductive tuning ring is in direct contact with a backing plate (backing plate 140) on an upper surface, wherein the backing plate extends behind the upper electrode and the conductive tuning ring (as evidenced by Fig. 1B, the backing plate 140 extends behind the inner electrode 120 and outer electrode 130) [Fig. 1B & Col. 3 lines 30-55].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Jin to include a backing plate and interlock the inner and outer electrodes of Jin, as in de la Llera, to provide mechanical security and thermal uniformity [de la Llera - Col. 5 lines 13-21 and lines 40-56, Col. 8 lines 55-60]. Dhindsa et al. (US 20100040768) also discloses a substantially similar apparatus where in an outer electrode member with apertures interfaces with a backing plate and thermal control plate [Dhindsa '768 - 0019, 0024]. Kennedy et al. (US 20050133160) also discloses that utilizing plates above a showerhead can provide mechanical security and uniform temperature distribution [Kennedy - 0015-0017, 0022]. Szapucki et al. (US 6050216) also discloses that forming an interlock between two structures helps maintain alignment and mechanical security [Szapucki – Col. 5 lines 20-25, 53-64]
Modified Jin does not specifically disclose wherein an outer edge of the conductive tuning ring is in direct contact with the conductance liner, wherein the conductance liner only contacts the edge ring on the lower surface of the edge ring.
Benzing teaches wherein an outer edge of an outer ring is in direct contact with the conductance liner (the shroud 450 is in contact with the upper insulator ring 414), wherein the conductance liner only contacts the edge ring on the lower surface of the edge ring (as evidenced by Fig. 8, the shroud 450 only contacts the focus ring 426 at a lower surface) [Fig. 8 & 0036-0039].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the conductance liner of Benzing to have the arrangement of the conductance liner of Benzing, since the arrangement of Benzing substantially minimizes plasma-wall interactions, reduces system maintenance, improves process stability, and decreases system-to-system variations [Benzing - 0022]. Chen et al. (US 20200051792) also discloses a plasma confinement shroud that is in direct contact with an outer electrode [Chen '792 - Fig. 1 & 0030-0031].
Modified Jin (Jin modified by de la Llera and Benzing) does not specifically disclose wherein the conductive tuning ring has at least one stepped portion on the lower surface that forms an extended bottom surface with a face, and a non-stepped portion at an outer periphery of the lower surface of the conductive tuning ring that is positioned directly above the edge ring.
Dhindsa ‘787 teaches and wherein the conductive tuning ring has both at least one stepped portion on the lower surface that forms an extended bottom surface with a face and a non-stepped portion at an outer periphery of the lower surface of the conductive tuning ring (the non-stepped and stepped portions are shown in the annotated drawings below) [Fig. 1B & Col. 7 lines 28-39].
PNG
media_image1.png
642
792
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the conductive tuning ring of Modified Jin to have a stepped portion and non-stepped portion, as in Dhindsa ‘787, to produce more uniform plasma [Dhindsa ‘787 - Col. 4 lines 56-65]. Furthermore, Dhindsa ‘787 discloses that various parameters of the step of Dhindsa ‘787 can be adjusted to obtain a desired etch rate profile (such as its placement, inner diameter, geometric features, step thickness, angle, degree of curvature, etc.) [Dhindsa ‘787 - Col. 11 lines 60-67, Col. 12 lines 1-3]. As such, one of ordinary skill in the art could arrive at the geometric features of the claimed invention via routine optimization to achieve predictable results (See MPEP 2143 D). Bise et al. (US 20130126486) also discloses an outer ring (outer electrode 310) with stepped and non-stepped portions [Bise - Fig. 3A]. Chen et al. (US 20150099365) also discloses that the geometry and angles of an outer ring can be adjusted to change etch rates [Chen '365 - 0041-0044].
It's further noted that the entire outer periphery of the conductive tuning ring (outer electrode 224) of Jin is located entirely above the edge ring (edge ring 244). As such, modification of the outer periphery of the conductive tuning ring of Jin to be non-stepped would result in the non-stepped portion being above the edge ring.
Regarding Claim 2:
Jin teaches a controller (system controller 264) configured to adjust a gas flow through the at least one gas port of the conductive tuning ring to control a plasma sheath of plasma formed in the process volume of the process chamber (controller 264 controls the gas delivery system 256 to supply gases from the gas sources 260 and into the processing chamber 200 through the center holes 280 and/or the side tuning holes 284; adjusting gas flow would affect plasma formation) to alter an edge deposition rate on a substrate (the side tuning holes 284 may be arranged to direct gases in an outer region of the processing volume 252 above the edge ring 244 and/or an outer edge of the substrate 232), wherein the at least one gas port comprises concentric rings of gas ports that include an inner ring of gas ports, an intermediate ring of gas ports, and an outer ring of gas ports (as evidenced by Fig. 2, there a plurality of side tuning holes 284 that are concentrically arranged) [Fig. 2 & 0037, 0039, 0040-0041, 0053].
It is noted that the limitations “to increase substrate deposition or etching uniformity, to control a plasma sheath of plasma formed in the process volume of the process chamber to alter an edge deposition rate on a substrate during a substrate deposition process,” are merely intended results of a step positively recited. In this case, the positively recited step is “by adjusting a gas flow through the at least one gas port of the conductive tuning ring.” Since Jin explicitly discloses adjusting gas flow (the side tuning holes 284 may be arranged to direct gases in an outer (i.e., edge or peripheral) region of the processing volume 252 above the edge ring 244 and/or an outer edge of the substrate 232), then Jin has disclosed the step that is positively recited, and as such, the intended results would occur [Jin – 0039-0040]. The court noted that a "‘whereby clause in a method claim is not given weight when it simply expresses the intended result of a process step positively recited.’" Id. (quoting Minton v. Nat’l Ass’n of Securities Dealers, Inc., 336 F.3d 1373, 1381, 67 USPQ2d 1614, 1620 (Fed. Cir. 2003)).
Furthermore, Jin explicitly discloses in Fig. 3B that the presence of the side gas flow 308 directly affects the deposition profile across a substrate (the deposition profile 320-1 illustrates results of a deposition step performed with reactant gases supplied only via the center gas flow 304; the deposition profile 320-2 illustrates results of a deposition step performed with reactant gases supplied only via the side gas flow 308 and inert gas supplied via the center gas flow 304) [Jin – 0005-0048]. As such, Jin discloses the positively recited step of adjusting edge gas flows, and it also discloses the intended result of changing deposition across a substrate.
Choi et al. (US 20080302303) also disclose that adjusting the edge gas flows affect deposition rates [Choi - 0072]. Seo et al. (US 20110203735) and Wang et al. (US 20190371581) also disclose that specifically controlling edge gas flows changes plasma distribution, sheathe characteristics, and etch rates [Seo – 0072, 0088; Wang – 0027, 0044]. Godyak et al. (US 20120160806) also discloses that gas flow can be controlled to affect plasma characteristics [Godyak - 0070].
Regarding Claim 3:
Modified Jin (Jin modified by de la Llera and Benzing) does not specifically disclose wherein the at least one stepped portion of the face of the extended bottom surface slants radially outwardly at an angle of greater than zero degrees to approximately 30 degrees from horizontal forming a radially outwardly slanted face between a first slant point and a second slant point, and wherein the at least one stepped portion of the face angles to the first slant point from the upper electrode and angles to the non-stepped portion from the second slant point.
Dhindsa ‘787 teaches wherein the at least one stepped portion of the face of the extended bottom surface slants radially outwardly at an angle forming a radially outwardly slanted face between a first slant point and a second slant point (the step has an outwardly slanted portion on outer surface 14, which extends from a first slant point to a second slant point) [Fig. 1B & Col. 7 lines 29-39].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the conductive tuning ring of Modified Jin to have a stepped portion and non-stepped portion, as in Dhindsa ‘787, to produce more uniform plasma [Dhindsa ‘787 - Col. 4 lines 56-65]. Furthermore, although Dhindsa ‘787 does not specifically disclose "wherein the at least one stepped portion of the face angles to the first slant point from the upper electrode and angles to the non-stepped portion from the second slant point," Dhindsa ‘787 does disclose that various parameters of the step of Dhindsa ‘787 can be adjusted to obtain a desired etch rate profile (such as its placement, inner diameter, geometric features, step thickness, angle, degree of curvature, etc.) [Dhindsa ‘787 - Col. 11 lines 60-67, Col. 12 lines 1-3]. As such, one of ordinary skill in the art could arrive at the geometric features of the claimed invention via routine optimization to achieve predictable results (See MPEP 2143 D). Bise et al. (US 20130126486) also discloses an outer ring (outer electrode 310) with stepped and non-stepped portions [Bise - Fig. 3A]. Chen et al. (US 20150099365) also discloses that the geometry and angles of an outer ring can be adjusted to change etch rates [Chen '365 - 0041-0044].
It's also noted that while Dhindsa ‘787 does not specifically disclose "an angle of greater than zero degrees to approximately 30 degrees from horizontal," Dhindsa ‘787 does disclose that slant angle is a result effective variable. Specifically, the geometric features of the step (including slant angle) can be adjusted to change etch rates [Dhindsa ‘787 - Col. 11 lines 60-67, Col. 12 lines 1-3]. As such, it would have been obvious to find optimum slant angles for an outer ring to obtain desired etch rates. It has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result-effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding Claim 4:
Modified Jin (Jin modified by de la Llera and Benzing) does not specifically disclose wherein at least one edge of the stepped portion is slanted upward.
Dhindsa ‘787 teaches wherein at least one edge of the stepped portion is slanted upward (as evidenced by the annotated drawings above, at least one edge of the stepped portion slants upward) [Fig. 1B & Col. 7 lines 29-39].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the conductive tuning ring of Modified Jin to have a stepped portion and non-stepped portion, as in Dhindsa ‘787, to produce more uniform plasma [Dhindsa ‘787 - Col. 4 lines 56-65]. Furthermore, Dhindsa ‘787 discloses that various parameters of the step of Dhindsa ‘787 can be adjusted to obtain a desired etch rate profile (such as its placement, inner diameter, geometric features, step thickness, angle, degree of curvature, etc.) [Dhindsa ‘787 - Col. 11 lines 60-67, Col. 12 lines 1-3]. As such, one of ordinary skill in the art could arrive at the geometric features of the claimed invention via routine optimization to achieve predictable results (See MPEP 2143 D). Bise et al. (US 20130126486) also discloses an outer ring (outer electrode 310) with stepped and non-stepped portions [Bise - Fig. 3A]. Chen et al. (US 20150099365) also discloses that the geometry and angles of an outer ring can be adjusted to change etch rates [Chen '365 - 0041-0044].
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin et al. (US 20190341275) in view of de la Llera et al. (US 8573152), Benzing et al. (US 20020170881), and Dhindsa et al. (US 6391787), with Dhindsa et al. (US 20100040768), Kennedy et al. (US 20050133160), Szapucki et al. (US 6050216), Chen et al. (US 20200051792), Bise et al. (US 20130126486), Chen et al. (US 20150099365), Choi et al. (US 20080302303), Seo et al. (US 20110203735), Wang et al. (US 20190371581), and Godyak et al. (US 20120160806) as evidentiary references, as applied to claims 1-4 above, and further in view of Dhindsa et al. (US 20090111276).
The limitations of claims 1-4 have been set forth above.
Regarding Claim 6:
Modified Jin does not specifically disclose a heating source with a temperature sensor configured to control a temperature of the conductive tuning ring independent of the upper electrode.
Dhindsa teaches ‘276 a heating source (heating elements 320; the embodiment of Fig. 4 includes the temperature control module of Fig. 3A and Fig. 3B) with a temperature sensor (temperature sensor 284) configured to control a temperature of the conductive tuning ring independent of the upper electrode (the multiple cooling/heating zones 202A-202C are independently controlled) [Fig. 3B, 4 & 0029, 0031-0032, 0039].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Modified Jin to have a heating source configured to independently control the temperature of a tuning ring, as in Dhindsa ‘276, to provide more control over temperature and etching uniformity [Dhindsa ‘276 - Fig. 4 & 0013, 0031].
Claim(s) 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin et al. (US 20190341275) in view of de la Llera et al. (US 8573152) and Dhindsa et al. (US 6391787), with Dhindsa et al. (US 20100040768), Kennedy et al. (US 20050133160), Szapucki et al. (US 6050216), Bise et al. (US 20130126486), Chen et al. (US 20150099365), Choi et al. (US 20080302303), Seo et al. (US 20110203735), Wang et al. (US 20190371581), and Godyak et al. (US 20120160806) as evidentiary references.
Regarding Claim 9:
Jin teaches an apparatus for processing substrates, comprising: a conductive tuning ring (outer electrode 224) configured to surround the upper electrode and is in electrical contact with the upper electrode when installed in a process chamber (outer electrode 224 and inner electrode 220 are collectively the upper electrode 216), wherein the conductive tuning ring is a unitary structure (as evidenced by Fig. 2, the outer electrode 120 is non comprised of multiple parts, and is instead a single, unitary structure), wherein the conductive tuning ring has at least one gas port on a lower surface (outer electrode 224 comprises side tuning holes 284; holes 284 are directly above edge ring 244, as evidenced by Fig. 2), a non-stepped portion at an outer periphery of the lower surface of the conductive tuning ring that is positioned directly above the edge ring (as evidenced by Fig. 2, the outer electrode 224 has at least a portion that is not stepped and is located directly above edge ring 244), and wherein the at least one gas port comprises concentric rings of gas ports that include an inner ring of gas ports, an intermediate ring of gas ports, and an outer ring of gas ports (as evidenced by Fig. 2, there a plurality of side tuning holes 284 that are concentrically arranged) [Fig. 2 & 0037, 0039, 0040-0041, 0053].
Jin does not specifically disclose a conductive tuning ring configured to surround and interlock with and retain an upper electrode in position.
De la Llera teaches wherein the conductive tuning ring (outer electrode 130) surrounds and interlocks with and retains the upper electrode (inner electrode 120) in position (outer electrode member 24 and inner electrode member are shaped to interlock with each other) [Fig. 1B & Col. 3 lines 30-55].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Jin to have the inner and outer electrode arrangement of de la Llera, since the arrangement of de la Llera provides mechanical security and thermal uniformity [de la Llera - Col. 5 lines 13-21 and lines 40-56, Col. 8 lines 55-60]. Dhindsa et al. (US 20100040768) also discloses a substantially similar apparatus where in an outer electrode member with apertures interfaces with a backing plate and thermal control plate [Dhindsa '768 - 0019, 0024]. Kennedy et al. (US 20050133160) also discloses that utilizing plates above a showerhead can provide mechanical security and uniform temperature distribution [Kennedy - 0015-0017, 0022]. Szapucki et al. (US 6050216) also discloses that forming an interlock between two structures helps maintain alignment and mechanical security [Szapucki – Col. 5 lines 20-25, 53-64]
Modified Jin does not specifically disclose wherein the conductive tuning ring has both at least one stepped portion on the lower surface that forms an extended bottom surface with a face and a non-stepped portion at an outer periphery of the lower surface of the conductive tuning ring that is positioned directly above the edge ring.
Dhindsa ‘787 teaches and wherein the conductive tuning ring has both at least one stepped portion on the lower surface that forms an extended bottom surface with a face and a non-stepped portion at an outer periphery of the lower surface of the conductive tuning ring (the non-stepped and stepped portions are shown in the annotated drawings below) [Fig. 1B & Col. 7 lines 28-39].
PNG
media_image1.png
642
792
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the conductive tuning ring of Modified Jin to have a stepped portion and non-stepped portion, as in Dhindsa ‘787, to produce more uniform plasma [Dhindsa ‘787 - Col. 4 lines 56-65]. Furthermore, Dhindsa ‘787 discloses that various parameters of the step of Dhindsa ‘787 can be adjusted to obtain a desired etch rate profile (such as its placement, inner diameter, geometric features, step thickness, angle, degree of curvature, etc.) [Dhindsa ‘787 - Col. 11 lines 60-67, Col. 12 lines 1-3]. As such, one of ordinary skill in the art could arrive at the geometric features of the claimed invention via routine optimization to achieve predictable results (See MPEP 2143 D). Bise et al. (US 20130126486) also discloses an outer ring (outer electrode 310) with stepped and non-stepped portions [Bise - Fig. 3A]. Chen et al. (US 20150099365) also discloses that the geometry and angles of an outer ring can be adjusted to change etch rates [Chen - 0041-0044].
It's further noted that the entire outer periphery of the conductive tuning ring (outer electrode 224) of Jin is located entirely above the edge ring (edge ring 244). As such, modification of the outer periphery of the conductive tuning ring of Jin to be non-stepped would result in the non-stepped portion being above the edge ring.
Regarding Claim 10:
Claim 10 is merely intended use and is 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). Dhindsa ‘787 discloses that various parameters of the step of Dhindsa ‘787 can be adjusted to obtain a desired etch rate profile (such as its placement, inner diameter, geometric features, step thickness, angle, degree of curvature, etc.).
Regarding Claim 11:
Modified Jin (Jin modified by de la Llera and Benzing) does not specifically disclose wherein the at least one stepped portion of the face of the extended bottom surface slants radially outwardly at an angle of greater than zero degrees to approximately 30 degrees from horizontal forming a radially outwardly slanted face between a first slant point and a second slant point, and wherein the at least one stepped portion of the face angles to the first slant point from the upper electrode and angles to the non-stepped portion from the second slant point.
Dhindsa ‘787 teaches wherein the at least one stepped portion of the face of the extended bottom surface slants radially outwardly at an angle forming a radially outwardly slanted face between a first slant point and a second slant point (the step has an outwardly slanted portion on outer surface 14, which extends from a first slant point to a second slant point) [Fig. 1B & Col. 7 lines 29-39].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the conductive tuning ring of Modified Jin to have a stepped portion and non-stepped portion, as in Dhindsa ‘787, to produce more uniform plasma [Dhindsa ‘787 - Col. 4 lines 56-65]. Furthermore, although Dhindsa ‘787 does not specifically disclose "wherein the at least one stepped portion of the face angles to the first slant point from the upper electrode and angles to the non-stepped portion from the second slant point," Dhindsa ‘787 does disclose that various parameters of the step of Dhindsa ‘787 can be adjusted to obtain a desired etch rate profile (such as its placement, inner diameter, geometric features, step thickness, angle, degree of curvature, etc.) [Dhindsa ‘787 - Col. 11 lines 60-67, Col. 12 lines 1-3]. As such, one of ordinary skill in the art could arrive at the geometric features of the claimed invention via routine optimization to achieve predictable results (See MPEP 2143 D). Bise et al. (US 20130126486) also discloses an outer ring (outer electrode 310) with stepped and non-stepped portions [Bise - Fig. 3A]. Chen et al. (US 20150099365) also discloses that the geometry and angles of an outer ring can be adjusted to change etch rates [Chen - 0041-0044].
It's also noted that while Dhindsa ‘787 does not specifically disclose "an angle of greater than zero degrees to approximately 30 degrees from horizontal," Dhindsa ‘787 does disclose that slant angle is a result effective variable. Specifically, the geometric features of the step (including slant angle) can be adjusted to change etch rates [Dhindsa ‘787 - Col. 11 lines 60-67, Col. 12 lines 1-3]. As such, it would have been obvious to find optimum slant angles for an outer ring to obtain desired etch rates. It has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result-effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin et al. (US 20190341275) in view of de la Llera et al. (US 8573152) and Dhindsa et al. (US 6391787), with Dhindsa et al. (US 20100040768), Kennedy et al. (US 20050133160), Szapucki et al. (US 6050216), Bise et al. (US 20130126486), Chen et al. (US 20150099365), Choi et al. (US 20080302303), Seo et al. (US 20110203735), Wang et al. (US 20190371581), and Godyak et al. (US 20120160806) as evidentiary references, as applied to claims 9-11 above, and further in view of Bettencourt et al. (US 8419959).
The limitations of claims 9-11 have been set forth above.
Regarding Claim 13:
Modified Jin does not specifically disclose wherein the conductive tuning ring and the upper electrode are formed as a unitary structure.
Bettencourt teaches wherein the conductive tuning ring (portion C) and the upper electrode (showerhead electrode 502) are formed as a unitary structure (as evidenced by Figs. 6A-6C, showerhead electrode 502 and portion C are a unitary structure) [Fig. 6A-6C & Col. 3 line 42, Col. 8 lines 50-51].
Modified Jin and Bettencourt are analogous inventions in the field of substrate processing apparatuses. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the inner and outer electrode members of Modified Jin to be unitary, as in Bettencourt, to make removal easier [Bettencourt - Col. 8 lines 7-22].
Response to Arguments
Applicant' s arguments, see Remarks, filed 02/29/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-4, 6, 9-11, and 13 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the combination of references does not specifically disclose “a conductive tuning ring surrounds and interlocks with and retains the upper electrode in position, wherein the conductive tuning ring is in direct contact with a backing plate on an upper surface, wherein the backing plate extends behind the upper electrode and the conductive tuning ring, wherein an outer edge of the conductive tuning ring is in direct contact with the conductance liner, wherein the conductance liner only contacts the edge ring on the lower surface of the edge ring, wherein the conductive tuning ring has both at least one stepped portion on the lower surface that forms an extended bottom surface with a face that is directly above and closer in proximity to the edge ring.” This argument has been considered but is now moot because the argument does not apply to the combination of references being used in the current rejection. The teachings of de la Llera et al. (US 8573152), Benzing et al. (US 20020170881), Dhindsa et al. (US 6391787), Kennedy et al. (US 20050133160), Szapucki et al. (US 6050216), Chen et al. (US 20200051792), Bise et al. (US 20130126486) 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 “wherein the edge ring is supported by the substrate support assembly on a lower surface of the edge ring.” The examiner respectfully disagrees, as the structure (such as bottom ring 412) that the edge ring 244 of Jin et al. (US 20190341275) is disposed on can still be reasonably considered as part of the substrate support assembly [Jin – Fig. 2, 4B & 0050]. It’s also noted that Jin considers the bottom ring 412 as part of the substrate support 400. Furthermore, the applicant has not provided any specific physical characteristics of the “substrate support assembly.”
Applicant argues that the combination of references does not specifically disclose “a controller configured to increase substrate deposition or etching uniformity by adjusting a gas flow through the at least one gas port of the conductive tuning ring to control a plasma sheath of plasma formed in the process volume of the process chamber to alter an edge deposition rate on a substrate during a substrate deposition process and wherein the at least one gas port comprises concentric rings of gas ports that include an inner ring of gas ports, an intermediate ring of gas ports, and an outer ring of gas ports,” because Jin is directed to adjusting deposition on the edge ring, and not the substrate, and therefore does not explicitly discloses adjusting substrate deposition rate.
In response, the examiner would like to note that the limitations “to increase substrate deposition or etching uniformity, to control a plasma sheath of plasma formed in the process volume of the process chamber to alter an edge deposition rate on a substrate during a substrate deposition process,” are merely intended results of a step positively recited. In this case, the positively recited step is “by adjusting a gas flow through the at least one gas port of the conductive tuning ring.” Since Jin explicitly discloses adjusting gas flow (the side tuning holes 284 may be arranged to direct gases in an outer (i.e., edge or peripheral) region of the processing volume 252 above the edge ring 244 and/or an outer edge of the substrate 232), then Jin has disclosed the step that is positively recited, and as such, the intended results would occur [Jin – 0039-0040]. Even if Jin is mainly directed to coating the edge ring, it still discloses adjusting edge gas flows which would affect the deposition rate at least at the edge of a substrate (again, Jin discloses that the side tuning holes 284 may direct gases to the edge ring 244 or the substrate) [Jin – 0039-0040]. The court noted that a "‘whereby clause in a method claim is not given weight when it simply expresses the intended result of a process step positively recited.’" Id. (quoting Minton v. Nat’l Ass’n of Securities Dealers, Inc., 336 F.3d 1373, 1381, 67 USPQ2d 1614, 1620 (Fed. Cir. 2003)).
Furthermore, Jin explicitly discloses in Fig. 3B that the presence of the side gas flow 308 directly affects the deposition profile across a substrate (the deposition profile 320-1 illustrates results of a deposition step performed with reactant gases supplied only via the center gas flow 304; the deposition profile 320-2 illustrates results of a deposition step performed with reactant gases supplied only via the side gas flow 308 and inert gas supplied via the center gas flow 304) [Jin – 0005-0048]. As such, Jin discloses the positively recited step of adjusting edge gas flows, and it also discloses the intended result of changing deposition across a substrate.
The examiner would further like to note that Godyak et al. (US 20120160806) is not being used to disclose the positively recited steps of adjusting side gas flows, but is rather being used as an evidentiary reference to support the claim that adjusting gas flows would perform the intended result of affecting plasma characteristics. Godyak discloses that flow rates through gas holes 1040 (there are also gas holes arranged on the periphery of window 1010) can be adjusted to change the spatial distribution of charged and neutral species generated in the process gas during plasma processing. Choi et al. (US 20080302303) also disclose that adjusting the edge gas flows affect deposition rates [Choi - 0072]. Seo et al. (US 20110203735) and Wang et al. (US 20190371581) also disclose that specifically controlling edge gas flows changes plasma distribution, sheathe characteristics, and etch rates [Seo – 0072, 0088; Wang – 0027, 0044].
Conclusion
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