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 1-35 are pending.
Claims 29-35 have been added.
Claims 1, 6-7, 11, 17-18, and 21-25 have been amended.
Claim Interpretation
Claims 1 and 11 recite a “watt density.” In the instant specification, the applicant has defined watt density as the heating element power divided by an actively heated surface area [Instant Application - 0040]. Furthermore, it appears as if the applicant is attempting to show that coil density or coil pitch is different in certain areas of a substrate support (as shown in Fig. 1c of the instant application). As such, the examiner is interpreting the “watt density” as essentially the coil density in a particular zone, as is depicted by the denser heating element areas in Fig. 1c of the instant application.
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.
Claim(s) 1-8, 21-25, and 27-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umino (JP 2005243243A) in view of Elliot et al. (US 20140014642), and Goto et al. (US 20080237216), with Ito (US 20040206747) as an evidentiary reference.
Regarding Claim 1:
Umino teaches a substrate support (heating apparatus 2) for a substrate processing system configured to perform a deposition process (the heating apparatus can be for a deposition apparatus) on a substrate (substrate 2), the substrate support comprising: a pedestal (heating surface 2a) having an upper surface configured to support the substrate; and N heating layers (heating elements 3a and 3b form two layers, as evidenced by Fig. 1), wherein the N heating layers are vertically-stacked within the pedestal below the upper surface (heating elements 3a and 3b form two vertically stacked layers, as evidenced by Fig. 1), and wherein each of the N heating layers includes a respective resistive heating element (the heating elements 3a and 3b may be a wire or a coil; each heating elements may be controlled independently) [Fig. 1 & Page 1 lines 56-60, Page 4 lines 17-18].
Umino does not specifically disclose wherein the resistive heating element in one of the N heating layers comprises at least three radial zones, a radially outermost zone of the at least three radial zones is configured to have a watt density bias lower than a watt density of a radial zone radially immediately inward of the radially outermost zone, and at least one of the resistive heating elements of at least one of the N heating layers has a different watt density bias in a first region of the pedestal than in i) a second region of the pedestal radially inward of the first region, and ii) a third region of the pedestal radially outward of the first region.
Elliot teaches wherein the resistive heating element in one of the N heating layers comprises at least three radial zones (the heater element 621 of Fig. 17 is split into three radial zones; there may be one or more heater elements between the middle plate layer 611 and the lower plate layer 610 ) [Fig.13-17 & 0059].
Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the heating elements of Umino to each have three radial zones, as in Elliot, to provide independent temperature control over specific areas, thereby improving consistency between processes [Elliot - 0008-0010, 0059]. Ito (US 20040206747) also discloses that utilizing three radial zones can aid in creating an even temperature distribution [Ito - 0090].
Furthermore, although Elliot does not specifically disclose "a radially outermost zone of the at least three radial zones is configured to have a watt density bias lower than a watt density of a radial zone radially immediately inward of the radially outermost zone," Elliot does disclose that watt density is a result effective variable. Specifically, Elliot discloses that a higher watt density increases heat applied over an area, while a lower watt density decreases heat applied over an area; the temperature profile on a wafer can be adjusted by adjusting the watt density [Elliot – 0007-0010]. Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum watt density distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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.
Additionally/alternatively, Goto discloses that coil pitch is a result effective variable. Specifically, that heating density can be chosen by differentiating coil pitch [Goto - 0034]. Modified Umino and Goto are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum spacing distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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. It is also noted that the instant specification states that watt density corresponds to the heating element power divided by an actively heated surface area [Instant Application - 0040]. If spacing between coils is changed, the density of coils in a particular area is changed, thereby changing the heated surface area.
Regarding Claim 2:
Umino teaches wherein each of the resistive heating elements includes a resistive coil (the heating elements 3a and 3b may be a wire or a coil; each heating elements may be controlled independently) [Fig. 1 & Page 4 lines 17-18].
Regarding Claim 3:
Modified Umino (Umino modified by Elliot) does not specifically disclose wherein at least one of the resistive coils has a different pitch than others of the resistive coils.
Although Goto does not specifically disclose "wherein at least one of the resistive coils has a different pitch than others of the resistive coils," Goto does disclose that coil pitch is a result effective variable. Specifically, that heating density can be chosen by differentiating coil pitch [Goto - 0034]. Modified Umino and Goto are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum spacing distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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 Umino (Umino modified by Elliot) does not specifically disclose wherein each of the resistive coils has a same pitch.
Although Goto does not specifically disclose "wherein each of the resistive coils has a same pitch," Goto does disclose that coil pitch is a result effective variable. Specifically, that heating density can be chosen by differentiating coil pitch [Goto - 0034]. Modified Umino and Goto are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum spacing distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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 5:
Umino teaches wherein the resistive heating elements in at least two of the N heating layers are aligned in a vertical direction (heating elements 3a and 3b form two vertically stacked layers, as evidenced by Fig. 1) [Fig. 1 & Page 1 lines 56-60, Page 4 lines 17-18].
Regarding Claim 6:
Umino does not specifically disclose wherein a watt density varies across an outer zone of the substrate support such that the outer zone of the substrate support has different watt densities at different points in the outer zone.
Elliot teaches wherein the resistive heating element in one of the N heating layers comprises at least three radial zones (the heater element 621 of Fig. 17 is split into three radial zones; there may be one or more heater elements between the middle plate layer 611 and the lower plate layer 610 ) [Fig.13-17 & 0059].
Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the heating elements of Umino to each have three radial zones, as in Elliot, to provide independent temperature control over specific areas, thereby improving consistency between processes [Elliot - 0008-0010, 0059]. Ito (US 20040206747) also discloses that utilizing three radial zones can aid in creating an even temperature distribution [Ito - 0090].
Furthermore, although Elliot does not specifically disclose "wherein a watt density varies across an outer zone of the substrate support such that the outer zone of the substrate support has different watt densities at different points in the outer zone," Elliot does disclose that watt density is a result effective variable. Specifically, Elliot discloses that a higher watt density increases heat applied over an area, while a lower watt density decreases heat applied over an area; the temperature profile on a wafer can be adjusted by adjusting the watt density [Elliot – 0007-0010]. Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum watt density distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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.
Additionally/alternatively, Goto discloses that coil pitch is a result effective variable. Specifically, that heating density can be chosen by differentiating coil pitch [Goto - 0034]. Modified Umino and Goto are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum spacing distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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. It is also noted that the instant specification states that watt density corresponds to the heating element power divided by an actively heated surface area [Instant Application - 0040]. If spacing between coils is changed, the density of coils in a particular area is changed, thereby changing the heated surface area.
Regarding Claim 7:
Umino does not specifically disclose wherein a watt density varies across an inner zone of the substrate support such that the inner zone of the substrate support has different watt densities at different points in the inner zone.
Elliot teaches wherein the resistive heating element in one of the N heating layers comprises at least three radial zones (the heater element 621 of Fig. 17 is split into three radial zones; there may be one or more heater elements between the middle plate layer 611 and the lower plate layer 610 ) [Fig.13-17 & 0059].
Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the heating elements of Umino to each have three radial zones, as in Elliot, to provide independent temperature control over specific areas, thereby improving consistency between processes [Elliot - 0008-0010, 0059]. Ito (US 20040206747) also discloses that utilizing three radial zones can aid in creating an even temperature distribution [Ito - 0090].
Furthermore, although Elliot does not specifically disclose "wherein a watt density varies across an inner zone of the substrate support such that the inner zone of the substrate support has different watt densities at different points in the inner zone," Elliot does disclose that watt density is a result effective variable. Specifically, Elliot discloses that a higher watt density increases heat applied over an area, while a lower watt density decreases heat applied over an area; the temperature profile on a wafer can be adjusted by adjusting the watt density [Elliot – 0007-0010]. Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum watt density distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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.
Additionally/alternatively, Goto discloses that coil pitch is a result effective variable. Specifically, that heating density can be chosen by differentiating coil pitch [Goto - 0034]. Modified Umino and Goto are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum spacing distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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. It is also noted that the instant specification states that watt density corresponds to the heating element power divided by an actively heated surface area [Instant Application - 0040]. If spacing between coils is changed, the density of coils in a particular area is changed, thereby changing the heated surface area.
Regarding Claim 8:
The limitations “wherein each of the resistive heating elements is configured to receive 1/N of an overall power provided to all of the N heating layers in total,” 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 heating elements 3a and 3b may be controlled independently [Umino - Fig. 1 & Page 1 lines 56-60, Page 4 lines 17-18].
Regarding Claim 21:
Umino does not specifically disclose wherein the at least three radial zones of the resistive heating element in the one of the N heating layers have different coil characteristics, such that the radially outermost zone has a watt density bias lower than a watt density of radial zones radially inward of the radially outermost zone.
Elliot teaches wherein the resistive heating element in one of the N heating layers comprises at least three radial zones (the heater element 621 of Fig. 17 is split into three radial zones; there may be one or more heater elements between the middle plate layer 611 and the lower plate layer 610 ) [Fig.13-17 & 0059].
Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the heating elements of Umino to each have three radial zones, as in Elliot, to provide independent temperature control over specific areas, thereby improving consistency between processes [Elliot - 0008-0010, 0059]. Ito (US 20040206747) also discloses that utilizing three radial zones can aid in creating an even temperature distribution [Ito - 0090].
Furthermore, although Elliot does not specifically disclose "wherein the at least three radial zones of the resistive heating element in the one of the N heating layers have different coil characteristics, such that the radially outermost zone has a watt density bias lower than a watt density of radial zones radially inward of the radially outermost zone," Elliot does disclose that watt density is a result effective variable. Specifically, Elliot discloses that a higher watt density increases heat applied over an area, while a lower watt density decreases heat applied over an area; the temperature profile on a wafer can be adjusted by adjusting the watt density [Elliot – 0007-0010]. Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum watt density distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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.
Additionally/alternatively, Goto discloses that coil pitch is a result effective variable. Specifically, that heating density can be chosen by differentiating coil pitch [Goto - 0034]. Umino and Goto are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum spacing distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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. It is also noted that the instant specification states that watt density corresponds to the heating element power divided by an actively heated surface area [Instant Application - 0040]. If spacing between coils is changed, the density of coils in a particular area is changed, thereby changing the heated surface area.
Regarding Claim 22:
Umino does not specifically disclose wherein the at least three radial zones of the resistive heating element in the one of the N heating layers have different coil characteristics, such that a radially inner zone of the at least three radial zones is configured to have a watt density bias higher than watt densities of the at least two other radial zones of the one of the N heating layers.
Elliot teaches wherein the resistive heating element in one of the N heating layers comprises at least three radial zones (the heater element 621 of Fig. 17 is split into three radial zones; there may be one or more heater elements between the middle plate layer 611 and the lower plate layer 610 ) [Fig.13-17 & 0059].
Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the heating elements of Umino to each have three radial zones, as in Elliot, to provide independent temperature control over specific areas, thereby improving consistency between processes [Elliot - 0008-0010, 0059]. Ito (US 20040206747) also discloses that utilizing three radial zones can aid in creating an even temperature distribution [Ito - 0090].
Furthermore, although Elliot does not specifically disclose "wherein the at least three radial zones of the resistive heating element in the one of the N heating layers have different coil characteristics, such that a radially inner zone of the at least three radial zones is configured to have a watt density bias higher than watt densities of the at least two other radial zones of the one of the N heating layers," Elliot does disclose that watt density is a result effective variable. Specifically, Elliot discloses that a higher watt density increases heat applied over an area, while a lower watt density decreases heat applied over an area; the temperature profile on a wafer can be adjusted by adjusting the watt density [Elliot – 0007-0010]. Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum watt density distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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.
Additionally/alternatively, Goto discloses that coil pitch is a result effective variable. Specifically, that heating density can be chosen by differentiating coil pitch [Goto - 0034]. Modified Umino and Goto are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum spacing distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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. It is also noted that the instant specification states that watt density corresponds to the heating element power divided by an actively heated surface area [Instant Application - 0040]. If spacing between coils is changed, the density of coils in a particular area is changed, thereby changing the heated surface area.
Regarding Claim 23:
Umino does not specifically disclose wherein the at least three radial zones of the resistive heating element in the one of the N heating layers have different coil characteristics, such that a radially innermost zone of the at least three radial zones is configured to have a watt density bias higher than a watt density of the radially outermost zone.
Elliot teaches wherein the resistive heating element in one of the N heating layers comprises at least three radial zones (the heater element 621 of Fig. 17 is split into three radial zones; there may be one or more heater elements between the middle plate layer 611 and the lower plate layer 610 ) [Fig.13-17 & 0059].
Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the heating elements of Umino to each have three radial zones, as in Elliot, to provide independent temperature control over specific areas, thereby improving consistency between processes [Elliot - 0008-0010, 0059]. Ito (US 20040206747) also discloses that utilizing three radial zones can aid in creating an even temperature distribution [Ito - 0090].
Furthermore, although Elliot does not specifically disclose "wherein the at least three radial zones of the resistive heating element in the one of the N heating layers have different coil characteristics, such that a radially innermost zone of the at least three radial zones is configured to have a watt density bias higher than a watt density of the radially outermost zone," Elliot does disclose that watt density is a result effective variable. Specifically, Elliot discloses that a higher watt density increases heat applied over an area, while a lower watt density decreases heat applied over an area; the temperature profile on a wafer can be adjusted by adjusting the watt density [Elliot – 0007-0010]. Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum watt density distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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.
Additionally/alternatively, Goto discloses that coil pitch is a result effective variable. Specifically, that heating density can be chosen by differentiating coil pitch [Goto - 0034]. Modified Umino and Goto are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum spacing distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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. It is also noted that the instant specification states that watt density corresponds to the heating element power divided by an actively heated surface area [Instant Application - 0040]. If spacing between coils is changed, the density of coils in a particular area is changed, thereby changing the heated surface area.
Regarding Claim 24:
Modified Umino (Umino modified by Elliot) does not specifically disclose wherein at least one of the resistive heating elements of at least one of the N heating layers has a smaller pitch between adjacent coils in a first region of the pedestal than in i) a second region of the pedestal radially inward of the first region, and ii) a third region of the pedestal radially outward of the first region.
Although Goto does not specifically disclose "wherein at least one of the resistive heating elements of at least one of the N heating layers has a greater pitch between adjacent coils in the first region of the pedestal than in i) the second region of the pedestal radially inward of the first region, and ii) the third region of the pedestal radially outward of the first region," Goto does disclose that coil pitch is a result effective variable. Specifically, that heating density can be chosen by differentiating coil pitch [Goto - 0034]. Modified Umino and Goto are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum spacing distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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. It is also noted that the instant specification states that watt density corresponds to the heating element power divided by an actively heated surface area [Instant Application - 0040]. If spacing between coils is changed, the density of coils in a particular area is changed, thereby changing the heated surface area.
Regarding Claim 25:
Modified Umino (Umino modified by Elliot) does not specifically disclose wherein: at least one of the resistive heating elements of at least one of the N heating layers has a smaller pitch between adjacent coils in the third region of the pedestal than in the first region of the pedestal radially inward of the first region; and pitch between adjacent coils in the second region does not vary.
Although Goto does not specifically disclose "wherein: at least one of the resistive heating elements of at least one of the N heating layers has a smaller pitch between adjacent coils in the third region of the pedestal than in the first region of the pedestal radially inward of the first region; and pitch between adjacent coils in the second region does not vary," Goto does disclose that coil pitch is a result effective variable. Specifically, that heating density can be chosen by differentiating coil pitch [Goto - 0034]. Modified Umino and Goto are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum spacing distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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 27:
Umino does not specifically disclose a varied watt density bias.
Elliot teaches a varied watt density bias (as evidenced by Fig. 17, the heater elements 621 has a varied watt density bias) [Fig. 13-17 & 0059].
Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the heating elements of Umino to each have three radial zones with differing watt densities, as in Elliot, to provide independent temperature control over specific areas, thereby improving consistency between processes [Elliot - 0008-0010, 0059]. Ito (US 20040206747) also discloses that utilizing three radial zones can aid in creating an even temperature distribution [Ito - 0090].
Elliot also discloses that watt density is a result effective variable. Specifically, Elliot discloses that a higher watt density increases heat applied over an area, while a lower watt density decreases heat applied over an area; the temperature profile on a wafer can be adjusted by adjusting the watt density [Elliot – 0007-0010]. Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum watt density distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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.
Additionally/alternative, Goto discloses that coil pitch is a result effective variable. Specifically, that heating density can be chosen by differentiating coil pitch [Goto - 0034]. Modified Umino and Goto are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum spacing distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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. It is also noted that the instant specification states that watt density corresponds to the heating element power divided by an actively heated surface area [Instant Application - 0040]. If spacing between coils is changed, the density of coils in a particular area is changed, thereby changing the heated surface area.
It is also noted that Claim 27 recites the limitation “wherein watt density bias of at least one of the resistive heating elements in the at least one of the N heating layers varies due to differences in at least one of i) defects in the at least one of the resistive heating elements, and ii) oxidation chemistry of the at least one of the resistive heating elements.” This limitation is directed to a product and process. More specifically, the watt density is being varied due to a certain factor. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. Umino modified by Goto teaches a heating elements with varied watt density, therefore the combination of references would teach a heating element with varied watt density.
Regarding Claim 28:
Umino does not specifically disclose a varied watt density bias.
Elliot teaches a varied watt density bias (as evidenced by Fig. 17, the heater elements 621 has a varied watt density bias) [Fig. 13-17 & 0059].
Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the heating elements of Umino to each have three radial zones with differing watt densities, as in Elliot, to provide independent temperature control over specific areas, thereby improving consistency between processes [Elliot - 0008-0010, 0059]. Ito (US 20040206747) also discloses that utilizing three radial zones can aid in creating an even temperature distribution [Ito - 0090].
Elliot also discloses that watt density is a result effective variable. Specifically, Elliot discloses that a higher watt density increases heat applied over an area, while a lower watt density decreases heat applied over an area; the temperature profile on a wafer can be adjusted by adjusting the watt density [Elliot – 0007-0010]. Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum watt density distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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.
Additionally/alternatively, Goto discloses that coil pitch is a result effective variable. Specifically, that heating density can be chosen by differentiating coil pitch [Goto - 0034]. Modified Umino and Goto are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum spacing distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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. It is also noted that the instant specification states that watt density corresponds to the heating element power divided by an actively heated surface area [Instant Application - 0040]. If spacing between coils is changed, the density of coils in a particular area is changed, thereby changing the heated surface area.
It is also noted that Claim 28 recites the limitation “wherein watt density bias of at least one of the resistive heating elements in the at least one of the N heating layers varies due to at least one of i) variations in material of the pedestal, ii) variations in thickness of the pedestal, and iii) variations in thermal conductivity of the pedestal.” This limitation is directed to a product and process. More specifically, the watt density is being varied due to a certain factor. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. Umino modified by Goto teaches a heating elements with varied watt density, therefore the combination of references would teach a heating element with varied watt density.
Regarding Claim 29:
Umino does not specifically disclose wherein a first one of the resistive heating elements of a first one of the N heating layers has a different watt density bias in the first region of the pedestal than i) the second region of the pedestal radially inward of the first region, and ii) the third region of the pedestal radially outward of the first region.
Elliot teaches wherein the resistive heating element in one of the N heating layers comprises at least three radial zones (the heater element 621 of Fig. 17 is split into three radial zones; there may be one or more heater elements between the middle plate layer 611 and the lower plate layer 610 ) [Fig.13-17 & 0059].
Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the heating elements of Umino to each have three radial zones, as in Elliot, to provide independent temperature control over specific areas, thereby improving consistency between processes [Elliot - 0008-0010, 0059]. Ito (US 20040206747) also discloses that utilizing three radial zones can aid in creating an even temperature distribution [Ito - 0090].
Furthermore, although Elliot does not specifically disclose "wherein a first one of the resistive heating elements of a first one of the N heating layers has a different watt density bias in the first region of the pedestal than i) the second region of the pedestal radially inward of the first region, and ii) the third region of the pedestal radially outward of the first region," Elliot does disclose that watt density is a result effective variable. Specifically, Elliot discloses that a higher watt density increases heat applied over an area, while a lower watt density decreases heat applied over an area; the temperature profile on a wafer can be adjusted by adjusting the watt density [Elliot – 0007-0010]. Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum watt density distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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.
Additionally/alternatively, Goto does disclose that coil pitch is a result effective variable. Specifically, that heating density can be chosen by differentiating coil pitch [Goto - 0034]. Modified Umino and Goto are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum spacing distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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. It is also noted that the instant specification states that watt density corresponds to the heating element power divided by an actively heated surface area [Instant Application - 0040]. If spacing between coils is changed, the density of coils in a particular area is changed, thereby changing the heated surface area.
Regarding Claim 30:
Umino does not specifically disclose wherein a second one of the resistive heating elements of a second one of the N heating layers has a different watt density bias in the first region of the pedestal than i) the second region of the pedestal radially inward of the first region, and ii) the third region of the pedestal radially outward of the first region.
Elliot teaches wherein the resistive heating element in one of the N heating layers comprises at least three radial zones (the heater element 621 of Fig. 17 is split into three radial zones; there may be one or more heater elements between the middle plate layer 611 and the lower plate layer 610 ) [Fig.13-17 & 0059].
Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the heating elements of Umino to each have three radial zones, as in Elliot, to provide independent temperature control over specific areas, thereby improving consistency between processes [Elliot - 0008-0010, 0059]. Ito (US 20040206747) also discloses that utilizing three radial zones can aid in creating an even temperature distribution [Ito - 0090].
Furthermore, although Elliot does not specifically disclose "wherein a second one of the resistive heating elements of a second one of the N heating layers has a different watt density bias in the first region of the pedestal than i) the second region of the pedestal radially inward of the first region, and ii) the third region of the pedestal radially outward of the first region," Elliot does disclose that watt density is a result effective variable. Specifically, Elliot discloses that a higher watt density increases heat applied over an area, while a lower watt density decreases heat applied over an area; the temperature profile on a wafer can be adjusted by adjusting the watt density [Elliot – 0007-0010]. Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum watt density distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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.
Additionally/alternatively Goto discloses that coil pitch is a result effective variable. Specifically, that heating density can be chosen by differentiating coil pitch [Goto - 0034]. Modified Umino and Goto are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum spacing distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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. It is also noted that the instant specification states that watt density corresponds to the heating element power divided by an actively heated surface area [Instant Application - 0040]. If spacing between coils is changed, the density of coils in a particular area is changed, thereby changing the heated surface area.
Regarding Claim 31:
Umino does not specifically disclose wherein: a first one of the resistive heating elements of a first one of the N heating layers has a different watt density bias in the first region of the pedestal than the second region of the pedestal radially inward of the first region; and a second one of the resistive heating elements of a second one of the N heating layers has a different watt density bias in the first region of the pedestal than the third region of the pedestal radially outward of the first region.
Elliot teaches wherein the resistive heating element in one of the N heating layers comprises at least three radial zones (the heater element 621 of Fig. 17 is split into three radial zones; there may be one or more heater elements between the middle plate layer 611 and the lower plate layer 610 ) [Fig.13-17 & 0059].
Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the heating elements of Umino to each have three radial zones, as in Elliot, to provide independent temperature control over specific areas, thereby improving consistency between processes [Elliot - 0008-0010, 0059]. Ito (US 20040206747) also discloses that utilizing three radial zones can aid in creating an even temperature distribution [Ito - 0090].
Furthermore, although Elliot does not specifically disclose "wherein: a first one of the resistive heating elements of a first one of the N heating layers has a different watt density bias in the first region of the pedestal than the second region of the pedestal radially inward of the first region; and a second one of the resistive heating elements of a second one of the N heating layers has a different watt density bias in the first region of the pedestal than the third region of the pedestal radially outward of the first region," Elliot does disclose that watt density is a result effective variable. Specifically, Elliot discloses that a higher watt density increases heat applied over an area, while a lower watt density decreases heat applied over an area; the temperature profile on a wafer can be adjusted by adjusting the watt density [Elliot – 0007-0010]. Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum watt density distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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.
Additionally/alternatively, Goto discloses that coil pitch is a result effective variable. Specifically, that heating density can be chosen by differentiating coil pitch [Goto - 0034]. Modified Umino and Goto are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum spacing distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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. It is also noted that the instant specification states that watt density corresponds to the heating element power divided by an actively heated surface area [Instant Application - 0040]. If spacing between coils is changed, the density of coils in a particular area is changed, thereby changing the heated surface area.
Regarding Claim 32: Umino does not specifically disclose wherein one of the resistive heating elements has a different watt density bias in each of the first region, the second region, and the third region than in each other one of the first region, the second region, and the third region.
Elliot teaches wherein the resistive heating element in one of the N heating layers comprises at least three radial zones (the heater element 621 of Fig. 17 is split into three radial zones; there may be one or more heater elements between the middle plate layer 611 and the lower plate layer 610 ) [Fig.13-17 & 0059].
Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the heating elements of Umino to each have three radial zones, as in Elliot, to provide independent temperature control over specific areas, thereby improving consistency between processes [Elliot - 0008-0010, 0059]. Ito (US 20040206747) also discloses that utilizing three radial zones can aid in creating an even temperature distribution [Ito - 0090].
Furthermore, although Elliot does not specifically disclose "wherein one of the resistive heating elements has a different watt density bias in each of the first region, the second region, and the third region than in each other one of the first region, the second region, and the third region," Elliot does disclose that watt density is a result effective variable. Specifically, Elliot discloses that a higher watt density increases heat applied over an area, while a lower watt density decreases heat applied over an area; the temperature profile on a wafer can be adjusted by adjusting the watt density [Elliot – 0007-0010]. Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum watt density distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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.
Additionally/alternatively, Goto does disclose that coil pitch is a result effective variable. Specifically, that heating density can be chosen by differentiating coil pitch [Goto - 0034]. Modified Umino and Goto are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum spacing distribution for heating elements to obtain a desired heating profile. 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. It is also noted that the instant specification states that watt density corresponds to the heating element power divided by an actively heated surface area [Instant Application - 0040]. If spacing between coils is changed, the density of coils in a particular area is changed, thereby changing the heated surface area.
Regarding Claim 33: Umino does not specifically disclose wherein: a first one of the resistive heating elements comprises a first portion in the first region having a first watt density, a second portion in the second region having a second watt density, and a third portion in the third region having a third watt density, and the first watt density, the second watt density, and the third watt density are different.
Elliot teaches wherein the resistive heating element in one of the N heating layers comprises at least three radial zones (the heater element 621 of Fig. 17 is split into three radial zones; there may be one or more heater elements between the middle plate layer 611 and the lower plate layer 610 ) [Fig.13-17 & 0059].
Umino and Elliot are analogous inventions in the field of substrate supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the heating elements of Umino to each have three radial zones, as in Elliot, to provide independent temperature control over specific areas, thereby improving consistency between processes [Elliot - 0008-0010, 0059]. Ito (US 20040206747) also discloses that utilizing three radial zones can aid in creating an even temperature distribution [Ito - 0090].
Furthermore, although Elliot does not specifically disclose "wherein: a first one of the resistive heating elements comprises a first portion in the first region having a first watt density, a second portion in the second region having a second watt density, and a third portion in the third region having a third watt density, and the first watt density, the second watt density, and the third watt density are different," Elliot does disclose that watt density is a result effective variable. Specifically, Elliot discloses that a higher watt density increases heat applied over an area, while a lower watt density decreases heat applie