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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 July 10, 2025, has been entered.
Claim Interpretation
An “electromagnetic source” as recited in claim 11 is interpreted in light of ¶[0006] of corresponding U.S. Patent Appl. Publ. No. 2021/0262117 as including, for example, a permanent magnet, a magnetic coil, an electrically charged ring, and/or an electrically biased mechanical support.
Claim Objections
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities:
As labeled, claim 19 purports to have a number of amendments via the use of underlining and strikethroughs. However, the language of claim 19 as amended on July 10, 2025, appears to be identical to the language of claim 19 in applicants’ March 25, 2025, reply. Accordingly, claim 19 should not have had any underlined or strikethroughs and should have been labeled as “(Previously Presented).”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(B) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 11, 14-16, 18, 27-29, 32, and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the first stable position" in ll. 6-7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear whether the recited “first stable position” is the same as or different from the previously recited “first position.” For examination purposes it is assumed that applicants intended to refer to the first position. Dependent claims 14-16, 18, 27-29, 32, and 35 are similarly rejected due to their direct or indirect dependence on claim 11.
Claim 11 further recites the limitation "a second distinct spatial position” in l. 7. It is unclear whether this is the same as or different from the previous recitation of “a second position” in l. 5. For examination purposes it is assumed applicants intended to refer to the second position. Dependent claims 14-16, 18, 27-29, 32, and 35 are similarly rejected due to their direct or indirect dependence on claim 11.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 11, 14-16, 19-21, 25-26, and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 5,145,711 to Yamazaki, et al. (hereinafter “Yamazaki”) in view of U.S. Patent No. 6,454,912 to Ahn, et al. (“Ahn”).
Regarding claim 11, Yamazaki teaches a method of growing diamonds (see, e.g., the Abstract, Figs. 1-14, and entire reference), the method comprising:
generating a plasma plume by using a microwave source to energize a precursor gas in a standing wave cylindrical chamber (see, e.g., Figs. 7-9 and col. 7, l. 26 to col. 8, l. 6 which teach forming a plasma plume within a reaction chamber (21) in order to deposit a diamond film by chemical vapor deposition from an energized precursor gas with Fig. 8(b) and col. 7, ll. 46-50 teaching that a standing wave is formed; see specifically Fig. 7 and col. 5, ll. 44-49 which teach that the plasma generating space (21) has a circular cross-section and extends between the substrate holder (30’) and the microwave window (35); moreover, since semiconductor substrates (30) such as Si are conventionally in the form of a circular wafer, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would expect the circular cross-section of the plasma generating space (21) to be in the same plane as the surface of the substrate (30) in order to promote uniform deposition around the entire circumference of the substrate (30) which therefore means that the plasma generating space (21) has a cylindrical shape which extends between the substrate holder (30’) and the microwave window (35)),
the standing wave cylindrical chamber configured so that the plasma plume is unstable or metastable, such that the plasma plume moves between a first position at which the plasma plume is generated and a second position (see, e.g., Fig. 7 and col. 5, ll. 44-49 which teach that the plasma generating space (21) is shaped like a cylinder with a circular cross section which necessarily means or, alternatively, would be reasonably expected to mean that the chamber is configured so that the plasma plume is unstable or metastable and moves between a first and second position (see ¶[0049] of the specification in corresponding U.S. Patent Appl. Publ. No. 2021/0262117 which teaches that a cylindrical chamber causes the plasma plume to move between at least two positions); see also Figs. 8(A)-(B) and col. 7, l. 26 to col. 8, l. 6 which teach that the electric field forms standing waves in regions (100) and (100’) and that it is difficult to form a uniform thin film outside these regions which therefore means that there are stable and unstable/metastable regions within the plasma); and
relocating the plasma plume from the first stable position to a second distinct spatial position within the chamber by adjusting an electrical field generated by an electromagnetic source, wherein the relocation alters the growth environment at the substrate (see, e.g., col. 6, ll. 61-65 which teach that the deposition speed can be increased by applying a bias voltage to the substrate holder (30’) which necessarily means that an electric field for forcing the plasma plume to a second distinct spatial position towards the substrate is generated by an electromagnetic source; alternatively, see Fig. 5 and col. 4, ll. 30-51 which teach the use of a DC bias source (15) connected to the substrate support (11) to generate a bias; accordingly, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated to generate an electric field by applying a bias voltage to the substrate (30) in Fig. 7 such that the plasma plume is forced towards the substrate to a second distinct spatial position as claimed in order to, for example, alter the growth environment at the substrate in order to increase the deposition speed).
Even if it is assumed arguendo that Yamazaki does not explicitly teach that the plasma plume is relocated to a second distinct spatial position within the chamber by adjusting an electrical field generated by an electromagnetic source, this would have been obvious in view of Ahn. In at least Fig. 1 and col. 3, l. 22 to col. 6, l. 23 Ahn teaches an analogous embodiment of an ECR CVD system (100) for the deposition of thin films onto a substrate (104) located in a deposition chamber (102). In Fig. 1 and col. 5, l. 38 to col. 6, l. 23 Ahn specifically teaches that the rate at which deposition occurs can be controlled by means of the position, dimension, and electrical bias of first (118) and second (120) grids which are located within the chamber (102) between the excitation chamber (126) and the substrate (104). The electrical field applied between grids (118) and (120) is controlled by means of a power supply (122) and electrical conductor (124) and can have a voltage ranging from -300 to -350 Volts relative to ground. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would look to the teachings of Ahn and would be motivated to incorporate a first (118) and second (120) grid above the substrate in the ECR apparatus of Yamazaki and apply a voltage of up to -300 to -350 V relative to ground therebetween in order to obtain greater control over the deposition rate during growth of a diamond thin film. In this case since the combination of Yamazaki and Ahn performs each and every step of the claimed process, it must necessarily produce the same results, namely that of relocating the plasma plume from a first stable position to a second distinct spatial position by adjusting an electrical field generated by grids (118) and (120). It is axiomatic that one who performs the steps of the known process must necessarily produce all of its advantages. Mere recitation of a newly discovered function or property, that is inherently possessed by things in the prior art does not cause a claim drawn to these things to distinguish over the prior art. Therefore, relocating the plasma plume from a first position to a second distinct spatial position, if not clearly envisaged, would be reasonably expected by the skilled artisan. See Leinoff v. Louis Milona & Sons, Inc. 220 USPQ 845 (CAFC 1984).
Regarding claim 14, Yamazaki teaches providing a single-crystal seed in the chamber (see, e.g., Fig. 7, col. 4, ll. 30-35, and col. 5, l. 33 to col. 8, l. 6 Yamazaki teaches providing a Si wafer as a substrate (30) in a reaction space (21); moreover, the Si wafer necessarily is or would be reasonably expected to be a single crystal since Si single crystal wafers are readily available and are commonly utilized as substrates in the microelectronics industry); depositing carbon from the plasma plume onto the single-crystal seed to form diamond (see, e.g., Figs. 7-9 and col. 5, l. 33 to col. 8, l. 6 which teach introducing a carbon-containing gas such as methane (CH4) and forming a plasma in order to deposit a diamond thin film on the substrate (30)).
Regarding claim 15, Yamazaki teaches that the single-crystal seed is on a mechanical support (see, e.g., Fig. 7 and col. 5, ll. 33-43 which teach that the seed crystal (30) is provided on a mechanical support in the form of holder (30’)).
Regarding claim 16, Yamazaki teaches that the second position is above the single-crystal seed, and the first position is at a top of the chamber (see, e.g., col. 6, ll. 61-65 which teach that the deposition speed can be increased by applying a bias voltage to the substrate holder (30’) which necessarily means that an electric field for forcing the plasma plume towards the substrate is generated; alternatively, see Fig. 5 and col. 4, ll. 30-51 which teach the use of a DC bias source (15) connected to the substrate support (11) to generate a bias; accordingly, a person of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to generate an electric field by applying a bias voltage to the substrate (30) in Fig. 7 such that the plasma plume is forced towards the substrate from a first position at a top of the chamber towards a second position above the substrate as claimed in order to, for example, increase the deposition speed). Alternatively, as noted supra with respect to the rejection of claim 11, in Fig. 1 and col. 5, l. 38 to col. 6, l. 23 Ahn specifically teaches that the rate at which deposition occurs can be controlled by means of the position, dimension, and electrical bias of first (118) and second (120) grids which are located within the chamber (102) between the excitation chamber (126) and the substrate (104). The electrical field applied between grids (118) and (120) is controlled by means of a power supply (122) and electrical conductor (124) and can have a voltage ranging from -300 to -350 Volts relative to ground. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would look to the teachings of Ahn and would be motivated to incorporate a first (118) and second (120) grid above the substrate in the ECR apparatus of Yamazaki and apply a voltage of up to -300 to -350 V relative to ground therebetween in order to obtain greater control over the deposition rate during growth of a diamond thin film. In this case since the combination of Yamazaki and Ahn performs each and every step of the claimed process, it must necessarily produce the same results, namely that of relocating the plasma plume from a first position at a top of the chamber to a second position above the single-crystal seed by adjusting an electrical field generated by grids (118) and (120). It is axiomatic that one who performs the steps of the known process must necessarily produce all of its advantages. Mere recitation of a newly discovered function or property, that is inherently possessed by things in the prior art does not cause a claim drawn to these things to distinguish over the prior art. Therefore, relocating the plasma plume from a first position at a top of the chamber to a second position above the single-crystal seed, if not clearly envisaged, would be reasonably expected by the skilled artisan. See Leinoff v. Louis Milona & Sons, Inc. 220 USPQ 845 (CAFC 1984).
Regarding claim 19, Yamazaki teaches a method of controlling diamond growth (see, e.g., the Abstract, Figs. 1-14, and entire reference), the method comprising:
providing a single-crystal seed having a growth interface in a standing wave cylindrical chamber (see, e.g., Fig. 7, col. 4, ll. 30-35, and col. 5, l. 33 to col. 8, l. 6 of Yamazaki which teaches providing a Si wafer as a substrate (30) on a holder (30’) located within a reaction space (21); moreover, the Si wafer has a growth interface and necessarily is or would be reasonably expected to be a single crystal since Si single crystal wafers are readily available and are commonly utilized as low-cost substrates in the microelectronics industry; see specifically Fig. 8(b) and col. 7, ll. 46-50 teaching that a standing wave is formed within the reaction space (21));
energizing a gas containing carbon using a microwave source to produce a plasma plume comprising a top end and a bottom end (see, e.g., Figs. 7-9 and col. 5, l. 33 to col. 8, l. 6 which teach introducing a carbon-containing gas such as methane (CH4) and forming a plasma using a microwave generator (24); moreover, Fig. 7 shows that the plasma plume produced within the plasma generating space (21), which is understood as being the area between the substrate (30) and the microwave window (35), has a top end near the microwave window and a bottom end near the substrate (30)),
wherein the bottom end positioned near the growth interface is rounded (see, e.g., Figs. 8-9 and col. 7, l. 26 to col. 8, l. 6 which teach that the magnetic field strength produced by magnets (25) and (25’) produces equipotential surfaces (26) which are rounded and, as a consequence, will necessarily produce a rounded plasma plume near the growth interface at the surface of the substrate holder (30’)); and
creating steering fields using an electromagnetic source to modulate the carbon atom deposition characteristics of the plasma plume (see, e.g., col. 6, ll. 61-65 which teach that the deposition speed can be increased by applying a bias voltage to the substrate holder (30’) which necessarily means that an electric field for steering the plasma plume towards the substrate is generated using an electromagnetic source; alternatively, see Fig. 5 and col. 4, ll. 30-51 which teach the use of a DC bias source (15) connected to the substrate support (11) to generate an electrical bias; accordingly, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated to generate an electric field by applying a bias voltage to the substrate (30) in Fig. 7 such that the plasma plume is steered towards the substrate in the claimed manner in order to, for example, increase the deposition speed).
Even if it is assumed arguendo that Yamazaki does not explicitly teach the use of steering fields using an electromagnetic source to modulate the carbon atom deposition characteristics of the plasma plume, this would have been obvious in view of Ahn. In at least Fig. 1 and col. 3, l. 22 to col. 6, l. 23 Ahn teaches an analogous embodiment of an ECR CVD system (100) for the deposition of thin films onto a substrate (104) located in a deposition chamber (102). In Fig. 1 and col. 5, l. 38 to col. 6, l. 23 Ahn specifically teaches that the rate at which deposition occurs can be controlled by means of the position, dimension, and electrical bias of first (118) and second (120) grids which are located within the chamber (102) between the excitation chamber (126) and the substrate (104). The electrical field applied between grids (118) and (120) is controlled by means of a power supply (122) and electrical conductor (124) and can have a voltage ranging from -300 to -350 Volts relative to ground. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would look to the teachings of Ahn and would be motivated to incorporate a first (118) and second (120) grid above the substrate in the ECR apparatus of Yamazaki and apply a voltage of up to -300 to -350 V relative to ground therebetween in order to create steering fields which modulate the deposition characteristics of the plasma plume and thereby provide greater control over the deposition rate during growth of a diamond thin film. In this case since the combination of Yamazaki and Ahn performs each and every step of the claimed process, it must necessarily produce the same results, namely that of creating steering fields which modulate the characteristics of the plasma plume by adjusting an electrical field generated by grids (118) and (120). It is axiomatic that one who performs the steps of the known process must necessarily produce all of its advantages. Mere recitation of a newly discovered function or property, that is inherently possessed by things in the prior art does not cause a claim drawn to these things to distinguish over the prior art. Therefore, the production of steering fields which modulate the characteristics of the plasma plume, if not clearly envisaged, would be reasonably expected by the skilled artisan. See Leinoff v. Louis Milona & Sons, Inc. 220 USPQ 845 (CAFC 1984).
Regarding claim 20, Yamazaki teaches that the growth environment is within a chemical vapor deposition chamber (see, e.g., Fig. 7 and col. 5, ll. 33-43 which teach that the growth environment is within a chemical vapor deposition (CVD) chamber).
Regarding claim 21, Yamazaki teaches that the gas is methane (see, e.g., Fig. 7 and col. 6, ll. 1-25 which teach the use of methane (CH4) gas).
Regarding claim 25, Yamazaki and Ahn teach that the steering fields are created using one or more magnetic fields, electric fields, and/or electromagnetic fields (see, e.g., col. 6, ll. 61-65 of Yamazaki which teach that the deposition speed can be increased by applying a bias voltage to the substrate holder (30’) which necessarily means that an electric field is utilized as a steering field; see also Fig. 5 and col. 4, ll. 30-51 of Yamazaki which teach the use of a DC bias source (15) connected to the substrate support (11) to generate a bias; accordingly, a person of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to generate a steering field by applying a bias voltage to the substrate (30); alternatively, see Fig. 1 and col. 5, l. 38 to col. 6, l. 23 of Ahn which specifically teach that the rate at which deposition occurs can be controlled by means of the position, dimension, and electrical bias of first (118) and second (120) grids which are located within the chamber (102) between the excitation chamber (126) and the substrate (104) with the electrical steering field applied between grids (118) and (120) being controlled by means of a power supply (122) and electrical conductor (124) and can have a voltage ranging from -300 to -350 Volts relative to ground).
Regarding claim 26, Yamazaki and Ahn teach that the growth environment includes an electrically charged metal stage configured to repel the center of the plasma (See, e.g., Fig. 7 and col. 5, ll. 44-49 of Yamazaki which teach that the substrate holder (30’) is made of a material such as stainless steel which necessarily creates a boundary condition for the plasma by creating a repulsive force when the holder (30’) becomes electrically charged. See also Fig. 5 and col. 4, ll. 30-51 which teach the use of a DC bias source (15) connected to the substrate support (11) to generate a bias which, through the application of the appropriate bias, would necessarily causes the substrate holder (30’) to become electrically charged and repel the center of the plasma. In this case a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated to configure the substrate (30’) such that it becomes electrically charged through application of the appropriate bias in order to minimize the occurrence of damage occurring as a result of energetic ions striking the substrate. Alternatively, see Fig. 1 and col. 5, l. 38 to col. 6, l. 23 of Ahn which specifically teach that the rate at which deposition occurs can be controlled by means of the position, dimension, and electrical bias of first (118) and second (120) grids which are located within the chamber (102) between the excitation chamber (126) and the substrate (104) with the electrical steering field applied between grids (118) and (120) being controlled by means of a power supply (122) and electrical conductor (124) and can have a voltage ranging from -300 to -350 Volts relative to ground. In this case the grids (118) and (120) of Ahn may be considered as an electrically charged metal stage as claimed.).
Regarding claim 35, Yamazaki teaches that the plasma plume has a boundary and a body (see Figs. 7-9 and col. 7, l. 26 to col. 8, l. 6 which teach forming a plasma plume within a reaction chamber (21) which necessarily means that the plasma plume has a boundary and a body), wherein relocating moves the boundary and the body (see Fig. 5 and col. 4, ll. 30-51 which teach the use of a DC bias source (15) connected to the substrate support (11) to generate a bias; accordingly, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated to generate an electric field by applying a bias voltage to the substrate (30) in Fig. 7 such that the plasma plume is forced towards the substrate to a second distinct spatial position in which the body and boundary of the plasma has been moved). Alternatively, as noted supra with respect to the rejection of claim 11, Fig. 1 and col. 5, l. 38 to col. 6, l. 23 Ahn specifically teaches that the rate at which deposition occurs during ECR CVD growth can be controlled by means of the position, dimension, and electrical bias of first (118) and second (120) grids which are located within the chamber (102) between the excitation chamber (126) and the substrate (104). The electrical field applied between grids (118) and (120) is controlled by means of a power supply (122) and electrical conductor (124) and can have a voltage ranging from -300 to -350 Volts relative to ground. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would look to the teachings of Ahn and would be motivated to incorporate a first (118) and second (120) grid above the substrate in the ECR apparatus of Yamazaki and apply a voltage of up to -300 to -350 V relative to ground therebetween in order to obtain greater control over the deposition rate during growth of a diamond thin film. In this case since the combination of Yamazaki and Ahn performs each and every step of the claimed process, it must necessarily produce the same results, namely that of moving the boundary and body of the plasma plume by adjusting an electrical field generated by grids (118) and (120). It is axiomatic that one who performs the steps of the known process must necessarily produce all of its advantages. Mere recitation of a newly discovered function or property, that is inherently possessed by things in the prior art does not cause a claim drawn to these things to distinguish over the prior art. Therefore,moving the boundary and body of the plasma plume, if not clearly envisaged, would be reasonably expected by the skilled artisan. See Leinoff v. Louis Milona & Sons, Inc. 220 USPQ 845 (CAFC 1984).
Claim 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazaki in view of Ahn and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 5,203,959 to Hirose, et al. (“Hirose”).
Regarding claim 18, Yamazaki teaches creating a second magnetic field or electric field to modify the shape of the biased plasma plume (see, e.g., Figs. 7-9 and col. 5, l. 33 to col. 8, l. 6 which teach that a magnetic field is created using two electromagnets (25) and (25’) which may be broadly considered as producing a first and second magnet which are both used to modify the shape of the biased plasma plume). Alternatively, in Figs. 1-7 and col. 1, l. 42 to col. 4, l. 17 as well as elsewhere throughout the entire reference Hirose teaches an analogous embodiment of a microwave assisted plasma CVD apparatus which includes a substrate (2) provided on a holder (3) as well as helmholz coils (5), a microwave generator (4), a waveguide (7), and a microwave introduction window (12) for generating a plasma within the reaction chamber (1). The microwave CVD system is also provided with external auxiliary magnets (6) which are provided inside the hemlholtz coils (5) and around the reaction chamber (1). As shown in Fig. 2(A)-(B) the auxiliary magnets (6) extend in the direction of the microwave propagation and function to enhance the strength of the magnetic field at the periphery of the reaction chamber. This causes the plasma gas to be confined to the center, thereby producing a higher density of highly energized carbon atoms for the deposition of highly crystallized diamond thin films. Thus a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would look to the teachings of Hirose and would be motivated to utilize a plurality of auxiliary magnets (6) in the method of Yamazaki and Ahn to generate a magnetic field which produces a higher density of energized carbon atoms for the deposition of diamond thin films with improved crystallinity.
Claim 27-29 and 32-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazaki in view of Ahn and further in view of U.S. Patent Appl. Publ. No. 2008/0226838 to Nishimura, et al. (“Nishimura”).
Regarding claim 27, Yamazaki and Ahn do not teach adjusting an amount of the plasma that is steered as a function of feedback. However, in Fig. 31 and ¶¶[0286]-[0309] as well as elsewhere throughout the entire reference Nishimura teaches an analogous system and method for the deposition of a diamond thin film onto a substrate (101) by plasma-based chemical vapor deposition (CVD). In ¶[0298]-[0302] Nishimura specifically teaches that the temperature of the substrate (101) during measured during film growth using a spectral radiance meter (126). The substrate (101) temperature will increase during film growth due to, inter alia, bombardment by energetic species from the plasma and this can influence the film uniformity and final film thickness. This is remedied by cooling the substrate (101) using a cooling member (113) and by adjusting the voltage applied to the anode (112) and cathode (120) in response to measured changes in the substrate (101) temperature. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would look to the teachings of Nishimura and would be motivated to provide a feedback mechanism which measures the substrate temperature during film growth and adjusts one or more of the plasma parameters such as the bias or grid voltage during film growth in order to suppress a deposition-oriented rise in the substrate temperature during film growth and obtain a diamond thin film having more uniform and reproducible properties.
Regarding claim 28, Yamazaki and Ahn do not teach that the feedback is temperature feedback. However, as noted supra with respect to the rejection of claim 27, in Fig. 31 and ¶¶[0286]-[0309] as well as elsewhere throughout the entire reference Nishimura teaches an analogous system and method for the deposition of a diamond thin film onto a substrate (101) by plasma-based chemical vapor deposition (CVD). In ¶[0298]-[0302] Nishimura specifically teaches that the temperature of the substrate (101) during measured during film growth using a spectral radiance meter (126). The substrate (101) temperature will increase during film growth due to, inter alia, bombardment by energetic species from the plasma and this can influence the film uniformity and final film thickness. This is remedied by cooling the substrate (101) using a cooling member (113) and by adjusting the voltage applied to the anode (112) and cathode (120) in response to measured changes in the substrate (101) temperature. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would look to the teachings of Nishimura and would be motivated to provide a feedback mechanism which measures the substrate temperature during film growth and adjusts one or more of the plasma parameters such as the bias or grid voltage during film growth in order to suppress a deposition-oriented rise in the substrate temperature during film growth and obtain a diamond thin film having more uniform and reproducible properties.
Regarding claim 29, Yamazaki and Ahn do not teach that the temperature feedback is a temperature of a seed. However, as noted supra with respect to the rejection of claim 27, in Fig. 31 and ¶¶[0286]-[0309] as well as elsewhere throughout the entire reference Nishimura teaches an analogous system and method for the deposition of a diamond thin film onto a substrate (101) by plasma-based chemical vapor deposition (CVD). In ¶[0298]-[0302] Nishimura specifically teaches that the temperature of the substrate (101) during measured during film growth using a spectral radiance meter (126). The substrate (101) temperature will increase during film growth due to, inter alia, bombardment by energetic species from the plasma and this can influence the film uniformity and final film thickness. This is remedied by cooling the substrate (101) using a cooling member (113) and by adjusting the voltage applied to the anode (112) and cathode (120) in response to measured changes in the substrate (101) temperature. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would look to the teachings of Nishimura and would be motivated to provide a feedback mechanism which measures the substrate temperature during film growth and adjusts one or more of the plasma parameters such as the bias or grid voltage during film growth in order to suppress a deposition-oriented rise in the substrate temperature during film growth and obtain a diamond thin film having more uniform and reproducible properties.
Regarding claim 32, Yamazaki and Ahn do not teach adjusting the steering fields as a function of feedback to make one or more diamond grow more uniformly. However, in Fig. 31 and ¶¶[0286]-[0309] as well as elsewhere throughout the entire reference Nishimura teaches an analogous system and method for the deposition of a diamond thin film onto a substrate (101) by plasma-based chemical vapor deposition (CVD). In ¶[0298]-[0302] Nishimura specifically teaches that the temperature of the substrate (101) during measured during film growth using a spectral radiance meter (126). The substrate (101) temperature will increase during film growth due to, inter alia, bombardment by energetic species from the plasma and this can influence the film uniformity and final film thickness. This is remedied by cooling the substrate (101) using a cooling member (113) and by adjusting the voltage applied to the anode (112) and cathode (120) in response to measured changes in the substrate (101) temperature. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would look to the teachings of Nishimura and would be motivated to provide a feedback mechanism which measures the substrate temperature during film growth and adjusts one or more of the plasma steering parameters such as the bias or grid voltage during film growth in order to suppress a deposition-oriented rise in the substrate temperature during film growth and obtain a diamond thin film having more uniform and reproducible properties.
Regarding claim 33, Yamazaki and Ahn do not teach adjusting an amount of the plasma that is steered as a function of feedback. However, in Fig. 31 and ¶¶[0286]-[0309] as well as elsewhere throughout the entire reference Nishimura teaches an analogous system and method for the deposition of a diamond thin film onto a substrate (101) by plasma-based chemical vapor deposition (CVD). In ¶[0298]-[0302] Nishimura specifically teaches that the temperature of the substrate (101) during measured during film growth using a spectral radiance meter (126). The substrate (101) temperature will increase during film growth due to, inter alia, bombardment by energetic species from the plasma and this can influence the film uniformity and final film thickness. This is remedied by cooling the substrate (101) using a cooling member (113) and by adjusting the voltage applied to the anode (112) and cathode (120) in response to measured changes in the substrate (101) temperature. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would look to the teachings of Nishimura and would be motivated to provide a feedback mechanism which measures the substrate temperature during film growth and adjusts one or more of the plasma parameters such as the bias or grid voltage during film growth in order to suppress a deposition-oriented rise in the substrate temperature during film growth and obtain a diamond thin film having more uniform and reproducible properties.
Regarding claim 34, Yamazaki and Ahn do not teach adjusting the steering fields as a function of feedback to make one or more diamond grow more uniformly. However, in Fig. 31 and ¶¶[0286]-[0309] as well as elsewhere throughout the entire reference Nishimura teaches an analogous system and method for the deposition of a diamond thin film onto a substrate (101) by plasma-based chemical vapor deposition (CVD). In ¶[0298]-[0302] Nishimura specifically teaches that the temperature of the substrate (101) during measured during film growth using a spectral radiance meter (126). The substrate (101) temperature will increase during film growth due to, inter alia, bombardment by energetic species from the plasma and this can influence the film uniformity and final film thickness. This is remedied by cooling the substrate (101) using a cooling member (113) and by adjusting the voltage applied to the anode (112) and cathode (120) in response to measured changes in the substrate (101) temperature. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would look to the teachings of Nishimura and would be motivated to provide a feedback mechanism which measures the substrate temperature during film growth and adjusts one or more of the plasma steering parameters such as the bias or grid voltage during film growth in order to suppress a deposition-oriented rise in the substrate temperature during film growth and obtain a diamond thin film having more uniform and reproducible properties.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed July 10, 2025, have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive and are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection set forth in this Office Action.
Applicants repeat their argument that applying a bias voltage to the substrate as per the teachings of Yamazaki does not and would not be expected to relocate the plasma body between distinct spatial positions and that doing so would likely destabilize or extinguish the plasma. See applicants’ July 10, 2025, reply, p. 5. Applicants’ argument is noted, but is unpersuasive. For one, it is based on arguments of counsel rather than factually supported objective evidence. Applicants are contending that the bias voltage increases ion energy at the substrate surface, but does not and would not be expected to relocate the plasma body. However, no conclusive evidence that the application of a bias voltage as taught by Yamazaki cannot and would not move the plasma in any way, shape, or form has been provided. Even if a larger electric field is needed to cause movement of the plasma, the key issue is that some discrete movement does occur. Even if it is by a very small amount, it is the Examiner’s position that this still reads upon claims 11 and 19 as the only requirement is that the plasma plume moves towards a second distinct spatial position as recited in claim 11 or that the carbon atom deposition characteristics are modulated as recited in claim 19. Since the claims still do not specify that there is a minimal amount of movement or modulation that must occur it is the Examiner’s position that applying a bias voltage as per the teachings of Yamazaki moves/modulates the plasma by distinct amount as recited in the pending claims. Alternatively, as detailed supra, the Examiner has introduced the teachings of U.S. Patent No. 6,454,912 to Ahn, et al. to teach the use of grids (118) and (120) to apply a voltage which will necessarily modify the plasma plume during film growth by ECR CVD. Moreover, since the method taught by the combination of Yamazaki and Ahn teaches each and every step of the claimed process it must necessarily produce the same results, namely that of causing the plasma to move to a second distinct spatial position as a result of adjusting an electric field.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH A BRATLAND JR whose telephone number is (571)270-1604. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday, 7:30 am to 4:30 pm EST.
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, Kaj Olsen can be reached on (571) 272-1344. 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.
/KENNETH A BRATLAND JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1714