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
Status of Claims
Claims 1-2, 4, 6-15, and 17-20 are pending
Claims 3, 5, and 16 have been cancelled
Claims 1, 4, , 8-9, and 19 have been amended
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, and 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US 7952048) in view of Nam et al. (US 20160053376), Lau et al. (US 20190127851), Ma et al. (US 20200040458), Takatsuki et al. (US 20040127033), Kawano et al. (US 20090159432), and Panagopoulos et al. (US 20090236447), with Marakhtanov et al. (US 20100252200), Arami et al. (US 5958140), Gregor et al. (US 20180130640), Chen et al. (US 20050109280), and Long (US 20030084848) as evidentiary references.
Regarding Claim 1:
Choi teaches a substrate treating apparatus (processing chamber 2300) comprising: a plasma generating device (plasma reactor 2100) provided at an upper portion of the lower electrode, including one reactor body (portions of plasma reactor body 2110 accommodating primary windings 2123) having a hollow bar shape (each of the respective portions of reactor body 2110 comprising each primary winding 2123 is a hollow bar) and provided with one upper electrode (primary winding 2123; plasma reactor 2100 may include at least one discharge chamber 2144) in an interior thereof [Fig. 24B, 33A-B & Col. 15 lines 55-63, Col. 18 lines 7-9, 39-48, Col. 21 lines 41-43], and provided with a plurality of independent discharge spaces (discharge chambers 2114) partitioned by a plurality of partition walls (discharge chambers 2114 may be divided by one or more partitions 2117) [Fig. 12A, 24A & Col. 14 lines 47-55, Col. 17 lines 28-38]; wherein the reactor body includes supply ports (a number of gas injection openings 2113 are formed, along the longitudinal direction of discharge chambers 2114), through which the reaction gas is introduced into the discharge spaces, respectively [Fig. 33B& Col. 21 lines 35-36], wherein an insulator directly surrounds the upper electrode (primary winding 2123 is surrounded by Core protecting tube 2130; core protecting tube 2130 is made of an electrical insulator) wherein the partition walls are nonconductors (discharge dividing partitions 2117 are made of the electrically insulating material such as quartz or ceramic) [Fig. 24A & Col. 16 lines 60-65, Col. 17 lines 32-33].
Furthermore, Choi discloses that the number of electrodes is a result effective variable. Specifically, to obtain a required volume of plasma, a plasma processing chamber may be easily extended and changed by increasing the number of discharge inducing bridges according to the size of a work substrate, and the length and number of discharge chambers 2114 may decrease or increase according to the area of the workpiece to be processed [Choi - Col. 10 lines 26-34; Col. 15 lines 55-63]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to find an optimum number of electrodes to obtain a desired plasma volume [Choi - Col. 10 lines 26-34; Col. 15 lines 55-63]. It has been held that that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05. It is noted that that one of ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize that decreasing the number of discharge inducing bridges would also affect plasma volume. Lastly, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that adjusting the number of discharge chambers 2144 would also mean adjusting the number of primary windings 2123 [Choi – Col. 16 lines 17-26].
Choi does not specifically disclose a lower electrode having an upper surface, on which a substrate is positioned.
Nam teaches a lower electrode (electrostatic chuck 166, which comprises electrode 180) having an upper surface, on which a substrate (substrate 103) is positioned [Fig. 1 & 0004, 0034, 0036].
Choi and Nam are analogous inventions in the field of substrate treating 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 substrate support of Modified Choi to include an electrode to provide ion energy necessary for performing a deposition or other plasma enhanced process, as well as to be able to control plasma characteristics [Nam - 0036, 0037]. Furthermore, the substrate support of Choi can include necessary components for the intended plasma processing on the workpiece substrate [Choi - Col. 22 lines 56-58].
Modified Choi (Choi further modified by Nam) does not specifically disclose wherein the lower electrode is configured to be rotatable.
Lau teaches the lower electrode is configured to be rotatable (the susceptor 206 is rotated during processing) [Fig. 2 & 0032].
Modified Choi and Lau are analogous inventions in the field of substrate treating 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 lower electrode of Modified Choi to be rotatable, as in Lau, to minimize the effect of thermal and process gas flow spatial anomalies within the process chamber and thus facilitate uniform processing of the substrate [Lau - 0032].
Modified Choi (Choi further modified by Nam and Lau) does not specifically disclose a controller configured to perform a control to independently supply a reaction gas into the independent discharge spaces, respectively.
Ma teaches a controller (controller 302) configured to perform a control to independently supply a reaction gas into the independent discharge spaces, respectively (flange 292 includes flange gas channels to maintain the channels of the gas supply lines 202 and 204; controller 302 can independently control flow through the channels using their respective valves) [Fig. 2, 3, 4 & 0007, 0025, 0031, 0035].
Modified Choi and Ma are analogous inventions in the field of substrate treating 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 apparatus of Modified Choi to include separate gas lines with flow controllers, as in Ma, to allow for independent control of gas flow rates to one or more channels of a gas injection system, which, in turn, can allow for fine tuning of various properties of films deposited using such systems and/or reactant/precursor concentration profiles within a reaction chamber [Ma - 0004].
Modified Choi (Choi further modified by Nam, Lau, and Ma) does not specifically disclose a surface area of the upper surface of the lower electrode is greater than a surface area bottom surface of the reactor body.
Although Takatsuki does not specifically disclose "a surface area of the upper surface of the lower electrode is greater than a surface area bottom surface of the reactor body," Takatsuki does disclose that lower electrode diameter is a result effective variable. Specifically, the diameter of a lower electrode can be adjusted to change an electric field profile. As such, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum sizing for a lower electrode to obtain a desired electric field profile [Takatsuki - 0105-0106]. It has been held that that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05. Marakhtanov et al. (US 20100252200) also establishes that lower electrode size may be adjusted to change plasma sheathe potential [Marakhtanov - 0009, 0013].
Additionally/alternatively, although Kawano does not specifically disclose "a surface area of the upper surface of the lower electrode is greater than a surface area bottom surface of the reactor body," Kawano does disclose that the area a reactor body occupies is a result effective variable. Specifically, the area a reactor body occupies affects deposition speed and film thickness. As such, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum area occupied for a reactor body to obtain a desired deposition profile [Kawano - 0003-0005]. It has been held that that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05. Arami et al. (US 5958140) also teaches that showerhead size affects process gas profile in a chamber [Arami - Col. 6 lines 55-67, Col. 7 lines 1-17].
Modified Choi (Choi further modified by Nam, Lau, and Ma, and Takatsuki) does not specifically disclose wherein a number of supply ports is corresponding to a number of the discharge spaces.
Although Panagopoulos does not specifically disclose "wherein a number of supply ports is corresponding to a number of the discharge spaces," Panagopoulos does disclose that gas inlet number is a result effective variable. Specifically, Panagopoulos discloses that the number of gas inlets for a showerhead can be adjusted to determine flow and mixing profiles [Panagopoulos - 0019, 0029, 0035, 0039, 0045, 0048, 0049, 0051]. As such, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum number of gas inlets to obtain a desired gas flow profile. It has been held that that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05. Panagapoulos also discloses that utilizing independent gas inlets for respective gas zones would be beneficial for finer control over gas flow [Panagapoulos - 0029, 0035, 0040, 0051]. It would have also been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the supply ports of Modified Choi to correspond to each discharge space since Panagapoulos also discloses that utilizing independent gas inlets for respective gas zones would be beneficial for finer control over gas flow [Panagapoulos - 0035, 0040, 0051]. Gregor et al. (US 20180130640) also disclosed that utilizing gas inlets for respective gas zones would be beneficial to provide finer control over gas distribution [Gregor - 0011]. Chen et al. (US 20050109280) and Long (US 20030084848) also discloses that utilizing a plurality of gas inlets for respective gas zones is a well-known technique in the art [Chen - 0049; Long - 0036].
Regarding Claim 2:
Choi teaches wherein the plasma generating device includes: an ejection hole (plasma jet slits 2111) provided on the bottom surface of the reactor body linearly along a lengthwise (as evidenced by Fig. 24A, plasma jet slits 2111 are formed in a lengthwise direction thereof) direction thereof [Fig. 24A-B, 33A-B & Col. 21 lines 33-34, 53 -55], and configured to eject plasma generated in the independent discharge spaces to the substrate positioned on the lower electrode (plasma jet slits 2111 are used to exhaust plasma) [Fig. 33A-B lines 53-55].
Furthermore although taught by the cited prior art, the claim limitation “configured to eject plasma generated in the independent discharge spaces to the substrate positioned on the lower electrode” is a functional limitation and does not impart any additional structure. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431- 32 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Since the structure of the prior art teaches all structural limitations of the claim, the same is considered capable of meeting the functional limitations. Where the claimed and prior art apparatus are identical or substantially identical in structure, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
Regarding Claim 4:
Choi teaches the upper electrode is configured to pass through the independent discharge spaces (primary winding 2123 passes through discharge chamber 2114, as evidenced by Fig. 24A) and an outer side of the upper electrode is surrounded by an insulator (primary winding 2123 is surrounded by Core protecting tube 2130; core protecting tube 2130 is made of an electrical insulator) [Fig. 24A & Col. 16 lines 60-65].
Regarding Claim 6:
Choi teaches a cross-section of the upper electrode is circular (primary winding 2123 has a circular cross section) and a cross-section of an insulator is annular (core protecting tube 2130 has an annular cross section) [Fig. 24B & Col. 18 lines 1-6].
Regarding Claim 7:
Choi teaches cross-sectional shapes of the discharge spaces are annular shapes that surround the upper electrode (as evidenced by Fig. 24B, discharge chamber 2114 has an annular cross-section that surrounds primary winding 2123) [Col. 18 lines 25-26].
Regarding Claim 8:
Modified Choi (Choi further modified by Nam and Lau) teaches the reactor body includes supply ports (injection openings 2113), through which the reaction gas is introduced into the discharge spaces, respectively (gas is supplied through openings 2113) [Choi - Fig. 33B & Col. 21 lines 32-43].
Modified Choi does not specifically disclose wherein gas supply lines are connected to the supply ports, respectively, and wherein the controller controls flow rates and mixing ratios of the reaction gas through control of valves on the gas supply lines.
Ma teaches wherein gas supply lines (supply lines 202 and 204) are connected to the supply ports (gas supply entrances to flange 292), respectively, and wherein the controller controls flow rates and mixing ratios of the reaction gas through control of valves on the gas supply lines (controller 302 can control flow independently through channels and their respective valves; controller 302 can be used to send flow ratio set points) [Fig. 1-4 & 0035-0037].
Modified Choi and Ma are analogous inventions in the field of substrate treating 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 apparatus of Modified Choi to include separate gas lines with flow controllers, as in Ma, to allow for independent control of gas flow rates to one or more channels of a gas injection system, which, in turn, can allow for fine tuning of various properties of films deposited using such systems and/or reactant/precursor concentration profiles within a reaction chamber [Ma - 0004].
Claim(s) 9-15 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US 7952048) in view of Nam et al. (US 20160053376), Lau et al. (US 20190127851), Ma et al. (US 20200040458), Takatsuki et al. (US 20040127033), Kawano et al. (US 20090159432), and Panagopoulos et al. (US 20090236447), with Marakhtanov et al. (US 20100252200), Arami et al. (US 5958140), and Gregor et al. (US 20180130640), Chen et al. (US 20050109280), and Long (US 20030084848) as evidentiary references.
Regarding Claim 9:
Choi teaches a substrate treating apparatus (processing chamber 2300) comprising: a spin head (substrate support 2320) having an upper surface (upper surface of substrate support 2320), on which a substrate (substrate 2330) is positioned, a plasma generating device (plasma reactor 2100) arranged on the spin head (plasma reactor 2100 is above substrate support 2320; plasma reactor 2100 can be modified to include primary winding 2123, which can be a capacitively coupled electrode; plasma reactor 2100 and 2100a have basically the same constitution) Fig. 24B, 33A-B & Col. 18 lines 7-9, 39-48, Col. 21 lines 41-43]; and a plurality of gas supply units (the respective partitions of gas supply unit 2150; although not specifically shown in the drawings, one or more gas separating partitions for gas distribution preferably are positioned in gas supply unit 2150) configured to a supply reaction gas to the plasma generating device (gas supply unit 2150 supplies gas to plasma reactor 2100) [Fig. 33B & Col. 21 lines 9-13, lines 41-43], wherein the plasma generating device includes: one reactor body (portions of plasma reactor 2100 accommodating primary windings 2123) having discharge spaces (discharge chambers 2144) in an interior thereof [Fig. 24B, 33A-B & Col. 18 lines 7-9, 39-48, Col. 21 lines 41-43], one upper electrode (primary winding 2123; plasma reactor 2100 may include at least one or two discharge chambers 2114) arranged in the discharge spaces; partition walls arranged between the reactor body and the upper electrode and configured to partition the discharge spaces (discharge chambers 2114 may be divided by one or more partitions 2117) [Fig. 12A, 24A & Col. 14 lines 47-55, Col. 15 lines 55-63, Col. 17 lines 28-38]; wherein the reactor body includes supply ports (a number of gas injection openings 2113 are formed, along the longitudinal direction of discharge chambers 2114), through which the reaction gas is introduced into the discharge spaces, respectively [Fig. 33B& Col. 21 lines 35-36], wherein an insulator directly surrounds the upper electrode (primary winding 2123 is surrounded by Core protecting tube 2130; core protecting tube 2130 is made of an electrical insulator) wherein the partition walls are nonconductors (discharge dividing partitions 2117 are made of the electrically insulating material such as quartz or ceramic) [Fig. 24A & Col. 16 lines 60-65, Col. 17 lines 32-33].
Furthermore, Choi discloses that the number of electrodes is a result effective variable. Specifically, to obtain a required volume of plasma, a plasma processing chamber may be easily extended and changed by increasing the number of discharge inducing bridges according to the size of a work substrate, and the length and number of discharge chambers 2114 may decrease or increase according to the area of the workpiece to be processed [Choi - Col. 10 lines 26-34; Col. 15 lines 55-63]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to find an optimum number of electrodes to obtain a desired plasma volume [Choi - Col. 10 lines 26-34; Col. 15 lines 55-63]. It has been held that that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05. It is noted that that one of ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize that decreasing the number of discharge inducing bridges would also affect plasma volume. Lastly, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that adjusting the number of discharge chambers 2144 would also mean adjusting the number of primary windings 2123 [Choi – Col. 16 lines 17-26].
Choi does not specifically disclose a lower electrode is arranged in an interior of the spin head.
Nam teaches a lower electrode (electrode 180) is arranged in an interior of the spin head (electrostatic chuck 166) [Fig. 1 & 0004, 0034, 0036].
Choi and Nam are analogous inventions in the field of substrate treating 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 substrate support of Choi to include an electrode to provide ion energy necessary for performing a deposition or other plasma enhanced process, as well as to be able to control plasma characteristics [Nam - 0036, 0037]. Furthermore, the substrate support of Choi can include necessary components for the intended plasma processing on the workpiece substrate [Choi - Col. 22 lines 56-58].
Modified Choi (Choi further modified by Nam) does not specifically disclose wherein the lower electrode is configured to be rotatable.
Lau teaches the lower electrode is configured to be rotatable (the susceptor 206 is rotated during processing) [Fig. 2 & 0032].
Modified Choi and Lau are analogous inventions in the field of substrate treating 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 lower electrode of Modified Choi to be rotatable, as in Lau, to minimize the effect of thermal and process gas flow spatial anomalies within the process chamber and thus facilitate uniform processing of the substrate [Lau - 0032].
Modified Choi (Choi further modified by Nam and Lau) does not specifically disclose wherein the number of the gas supply units corresponds to the number of the plurality of discharge spaces.
Ma teaches wherein the number of the gas supply units corresponds to the number of the plurality of discharge spaces (flange 292 includes flange gas channels to correspond to the channels of the gas supply lines 202 and 204) [Fig. 2, 3, 4 & 0007, 0025, 0031, 0035].
Modified Choi and Ma are analogous inventions in the field of substrate treating 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 apparatus of Modified Choi to include separate gas lines for each discharge space, with flow controllers for each gas line, as in Ma, to allow for independent control of gas flow rates to one or more channels of a gas injection system, which, in turn, can allow for fine tuning of various properties of films deposited using such systems and/or reactant/precursor concentration profiles within a reaction chamber [Ma - 0004].
Modified Choi (Choi further modified by Nam, Lau, and Ma) does not specifically disclose a surface area of the upper surface of the lower electrode is greater than a surface area bottom surface of the reactor body.
Although Takatsuki does not specifically disclose "a surface area of the upper surface of the lower electrode is greater than a surface area bottom surface of the reactor body," Takatsuki does disclose that lower electrode diameter is a result effective variable. Specifically, the diameter of a lower electrode can be adjusted to change an electric field profile. As such, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum sizing for a lower electrode to obtain a desired electric field profile [Takatsuki - 0105-0106]. It has been held that that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05. Marakhtanov et al. (US 20100252200) also establishes that lower electrode size may be adjusted to change plasma sheathe potential [Marakhtanov - 0009, 0013].
Additionally/alternatively, although Kawano does not specifically disclose "a surface area of the upper surface of the lower electrode is greater than a surface area bottom surface of the reactor body," Kawano does disclose that the area a reactor body occupies is a result effective variable. Specifically, the area a reactor body occupies affects deposition speed and film thickness. As such, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum area occupied for a reactor body to obtain a desired deposition profile [Kawano - 0003-0005]. It has been held that that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05. Arami et al. (US 5958140) also teaches that showerhead size affects process gas profile in a chamber [Arami - Col. 6 lines 55-67, Col. 7 lines 1-17].
Modified Choi (Choi further modified by Nam, Lau, and Ma, and Takatsuki) does not specifically disclose wherein a number of supply ports is corresponding to a number of the discharge spaces.
Although Panagopoulos does not specifically disclose "wherein a number of supply ports is corresponding to a number of the discharge spaces," Panagopoulos does disclose that gas inlet number is a result effective variable. Specifically, Panagopoulos discloses that the number of gas inlets for a showerhead can be adjusted to determine flow and mixing profiles [Panagopoulos - 0019, 0029, 0035, 0039, 0045, 0048, 0049, 0051]. As such, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum number of gas inlets to obtain a desired gas flow profile. It has been held that that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05. Panagapoulos also discloses that utilizing independent gas inlets for respective gas zones would be beneficial for finer control over gas flow [Panagapoulos - 0029, 0035, 0040, 0051]. It would have also been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the supply ports of Modified Choi to correspond to each discharge space since Panagapoulos also discloses that utilizing independent gas inlets for respective gas zones would be beneficial for finer control over gas flow [Panagapoulos - 0035, 0040, 0051]. Gregor et al. (US 20180130640) also disclosed that utilizing gas inlets for respective gas zones would be beneficial to provide finer control over gas distribution [Gregor - 0011]. Chen et al. (US 20050109280) and Long (US 20030084848) also discloses that utilizing a plurality of gas inlets for respective gas zones is a well-known technique in the art [Chen - 0049; Long - 0036].
Regarding Claim 10:
Modified Choi (Choi further modified by Nam and Lau) does not specifically disclose a controller configured to control the gas supply units, and wherein the controller performs a control to independently supply the reaction gas into the plurality of discharge spaces, respectively.
Ma teaches a controller (controller 302) configured to control the gas supply units, and wherein the controllers performs a control to independently supply a reaction gas into the plurality of independent discharge spaces (flange 292 includes flange gas channels to maintain the channels of the gas supply lines 202 and 204; controller 302 can independently control flow through the channels using their respective valves) [Fig. 2, 3, 4 & 0007, 0025, 0031, 0035].
Modified Choi and Ma are analogous inventions in the field of substrate treating 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 apparatus of Modified Choi to include separate gas lines for each discharge space, with flow controllers for each gas line, as in Ma, to allow for independent control of gas flow rates to one or more channels of a gas injection system, which, in turn, can allow for fine tuning of various properties of films deposited using such systems and/or reactant/precursor concentration profiles within a reaction chamber [Ma - 0004].
Regarding Claim 11:
Choi teaches wherein the reactor body includes: an upper wall; a lower wall arranged on an opposite side of the upper wall; and side walls connecting the upper wall and the lower wall (upper, lower, and first to fourth sidewalls are shown in the annotated drawings below) [Fig. 23, 24A-B], and wherein an ejection hole (plasma jet slits 2111) that is opened in a direction that faces the substrate positioned on the spin head is formed in the lower wall (as evidenced by Fig. 33B, plasma jet slits 2111 face substrate 2330) [Fig. 33B & Col. 21 lines 16 -18].
PNG
media_image1.png
651
661
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
261
576
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 12:
Modified Choi (Choi further modified by Nam and Lau) teaches each of the gas supply units includes: a supply port (gas injection opening 2113) formed on the upper wall [Fig. 33B & Col. 21 lines 32-34]; and wherein an inner diameter of the ejection hole is larger than an inner diameter of the supply port (as evidenced by Fig. 33B, gas injection slit 2111 has an opening larger than gas injection opening 2113) [Choi - Fig. 33B & Col. 21 lines 32-34].
Modified Choi does not specifically disclose a gas supply line connected to the supply port.
Ma teaches and a gas supply line (gas supply lines 202 and 204) connected to the supply port (inlets of the channels of flange 292) [Fig. 2 & 0032].
Modified Choi and Ma are analogous inventions in the field of substrate treating 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 apparatus of Modified Choi to include separate gas lines for each discharge space, with flow controllers for each gas line, as in Ma, to allow for independent control of gas flow rates to one or more channels of a gas injection system, which, in turn, can allow for fine tuning of various properties of films deposited using such systems and/or reactant/precursor concentration profiles within a reaction chamber [Ma - 0004].
Regarding Claim 13:
Choi teaches having an upper electrode (plasma reactor 2100 can be modified to include primary winding 2123, which can be a capacitively coupled electrode; plasma reactor 2100 and 2100a have basically the same constitution) [Fig. 24B, 33A-B & Col. 18 lines 7-9, 39-48, Col. 21 lines 41-43]; and an insulator arranged on an outer peripheral surface of the electrode (primary winding 2123 is surrounded by Core protecting tube 2130; core protecting tube 2130 is made of an electrical insulator) [Fig. 24A & Col. 16 lines 60-65].
The Fig. 33B embodiment of Choi does not specifically disclose wherein the partition walls are arranged between the insulator and the reactor body.
The Fig. 12A embodiment of Choi teaches wherein the partition walls (partitions 1340) are arranged between an outer structure (outer surface of discharge inducing bridges 1300) and the reactor body (the body of discharge inducing bridges 1300) [Fig. 12A-B & Col. 14 lines 45-55].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the arrangement of the outer structure (core protecting tube 2130) of the Fig. 33B embodiment of Choi with the arrangement of the partitions and outer structure (outer surface of discharge inducing bridges 1300) of the Fig. 12A embodiment of Choi in order to prevent biasing between different discharge spaces, thereby resulting in uniform plasma discharge [Col. 14 lines 47-55].
Regarding Claim 14:
The Fig. 33B embodiment of Choi does not specifically disclose wherein the partition walls include a first partition wall and a second partition wall that are spaced apart from each other, wherein the discharge spaces include: a first discharge space formed between the first partition wall and the reactor body; a second discharge space formed between the first partition wall and the second partition wall; and a third discharge space formed between the second partition wall and the reactor body, wherein the second discharge space faces a central area of the substrate positioned on the spin head, and wherein the first discharge space and the third discharge space face a peripheral area of the substrate positioned on the spin head.
The Fig. 12A embodiment of Choi teaches wherein the partition walls include a first partition wall and a second partition wall that are spaced apart from each other, wherein the discharge spaces include: a first discharge space formed between the first partition wall and the reactor body; a second discharge space formed between the first partition wall and the second partition wall; and a third discharge space formed between the second partition wall and the reactor body (first, second, and third discharge spaces are shown in the annotated drawings below; first and second partition walls are shown in the same annotated drawings below), wherein the second discharge space faces a central area of the substrate positioned on the spin head, and wherein the first discharge space and the third discharge space face a peripheral area of the substrate positioned on the spin head (as evidenced by Fig. 12A-12B, 29C, 33A-B, and 35-36, if overlayed on substrate 2330, the respective discharge spaces of Modified Choi would correspond to the center and peripheral portions of substrate 2330, respectively) [Fig. 12A-B, 29C, 33A-B, 35-36 & Col. 14 lines 45-55, Col. 21 lines 14-24, Col. 22 lines 40-50].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the plasma generating device of the Fig. 33B embodiment of Choi, with the partition walls of the Fig. 12A embodiment of Choi in order to prevent biasing between different discharge spaces, thereby resulting in uniform plasma discharge [Col. 14 lines 47-55].
PNG
media_image3.png
348
599
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 15:
Modified Choi (Choi further modified by Nam and Lau) does not specifically disclose wherein each of the gas supply units includes: a first gas supply line configured to supply the reaction gas to the first discharge space; a second gas supply line configured to supply the reaction gas to the second discharge space; and a third gas supply line configured to supply the reaction gas to the third discharge space, wherein the substrate treating apparatus further comprises: a controller configured to control the gas supply units such that the reaction gas is independently supplied to the first to third discharge space, respectively, and wherein the controller controls such that a flow rate of the reaction gas supplied to the second discharge space and flow rates of the reaction gas supplied to each of the first and third discharge spaces are different.
Ma teaches each of the gas supply units includes: a first gas supply line configured to supply the reaction gas to the first discharge space; a second gas supply line configured to supply the reaction gas to the second discharge space; and a third gas supply line configured to supply the reaction gas to the third discharge space (first, second, and third gas supply lines are shown in the annotated drawings below; first, second, and third discharge spaces are shown in the same annotated drawings below), wherein the substrate treating apparatus further comprises: a controller (controller 302) configured to control the gas supply units such that the reaction gas is independently supplied to the first to third discharge space, respectively, and wherein the controller controls such that a flow rate of the reaction gas supplied to the second discharge space and flow rates of the reaction gas supplied to each of the first and third discharge spaces are different (flange 292 includes flange gas channels to maintain the channels of the gas supply lines 202 and 204; controller 302 can independently control flow through the channels using their respective valves) [Fig. 2, 3, 4 & 0007, 0025, 0031, 0035].
Modified Choi and Ma are analogous inventions in the field of substrate treating 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 apparatus of Modified Choi to include separate gas lines with flow controllers, as in Ma, to allow for independent control of gas flow rates to one or more channels of a gas injection system, which, in turn, can allow for fine tuning of various properties of films deposited using such systems and/or reactant/precursor concentration profiles within a reaction chamber [Ma - 0004].
PNG
media_image4.png
673
627
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 17:
Choi teaches a cross-section of the electrode of the upper electrode is circular (primary winding 2123 has a circular cross section) and a cross-section of the insulator is annular (core protecting tube 2130 has an annular cross section) [Fig. 24B & Col. 18 lines 1-6].
Regarding Claim 18:
Choi teaches cross-sectional shapes of the discharge spaces are annular shapes that surround the upper electrode (as evidenced by Fig. 24B, discharge chamber 2114 has an annular cross-section that surrounds primary winding 2123) [Col. 18 lines 25-26].
Claim(s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US 7952048) in view of Lau et al. (US 20190127851), Nam et al. (US 20160053376), Ma et al. (US 20200040458), Takatsuki et al. (US 20040127033), Kawano et al. (US 20090159432), and Panagopoulos et al. (US 20090236447), with Marakhtanov et al. (US 20100252200), Arami et al. (US 5958140), and Gregor et al. (US 20180130640), Chen et al. (US 20050109280), and Long (US 20030084848) as evidentiary references.
Regarding Claim 19:
Choi teaches a substrate treating apparatus (processing chamber 2300) comprising: a plasma generating device (plasma reactor 2100) provided at an upper portion of a substrate support (substrate support 2320) [Fig. 24B, 33A-B & Col. 18 lines 7-9, 39-48, Col. 21 lines 41-43]; gas supply units (the respective partitions of gas supply unit 2150; although not specifically shown in the drawings, one or more gas separating partitions for gas distribution preferably are positioned in gas supply unit 2150) configured to a supply reaction gas to the plasma generating device (gas supply unit 2150 supplies gas to plasma reactor 2100) [Fig. 33B & Col. 21 lines 9-13, lines 41-43], wherein the plasma generating device includes: one reactor body (portions of plasma reactor 2100 accommodating primary windings 2123) having discharge spaces (discharge chambers 2144) in an interior thereof [Fig. 24B, 33A-B & Col. 18 lines 7-9, 39-48, Col. 21 lines 41-43], one upper electrode (primary winding 2123; plasma reactor 2100 may include at least one or two discharge chambers 2114) arranged in the discharge spaces; wherein the reactor body includes supply ports (a number of gas injection openings 2113 are formed, along the longitudinal direction of discharge chambers 2114), through which the reaction gas is introduced into the discharge spaces, respectively [Fig. 33B& Col. 21 lines 35-36], wherein an insulator directly surrounds the upper electrode (primary winding 2123 is surrounded by Core protecting tube 2130; core protecting tube 2130 is made of an electrical insulator) wherein the partition walls are nonconductors (discharge dividing partitions 2117 are made of the electrically insulating material such as quartz or ceramic) [Fig. 24A & Col. 16 lines 60-65, Col. 17 lines 32-33].
Furthermore, Choi discloses that the number of electrodes is a result effective variable. Specifically, to obtain a required volume of plasma, a plasma processing chamber may be easily extended and changed by increasing the number of discharge inducing bridges according to the size of a work substrate, and the length and number of discharge chambers 2114 may decrease or increase according to the area of the workpiece to be processed [Choi - Col. 10 lines 26-34; Col. 15 lines 55-63]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to find an optimum number of electrodes to obtain a desired plasma volume [Choi - Col. 10 lines 26-34; Col. 15 lines 55-63]. It has been held that that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05. It is noted that that one of ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize that decreasing the number of discharge inducing bridges would also affect plasma volume. Lastly, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that adjusting the number of discharge chambers 2144 would also mean adjusting the number of primary windings 2123 [Choi – Col. 16 lines 17-26].
The Fig. 33B embodiment of Choi does not specifically disclose a first partition wall and a second partition walls configured to partition the discharge spaces to first to third independent discharge spaces; and an upper electrode arranged in the discharge spaces and passing through the plurality of partition walls, and one upper electrode arranged in the discharge spaces and passing through the plurality of partition walls.
The Fig. 12A embodiment of Choi teaches a first partition wall and a second partition wall configured to partition the discharge spaces to first to third independent discharge spaces (first, second, and third discharge spaces are shown in the annotated drawings below; first and second partition walls are shown in the same annotated drawings below); and an upper electrode (discharge inducing bridges 1300) arranged in the discharge spaces and passing through the plurality of partition walls (discharge inducing bridges 1300 pass through partition walls 1340) [Fig. 12A-B & Col. 14 lines 45-55], one upper electrode (core 1310) arranged in the discharge spaces and passing through the plurality of partition walls (discharge inducing bridges 1300 pass through partitions 1340, as evidenced by Fig. 12B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the plasma generating device of the Fig. 33B embodiment of Choi, with the partition walls of the Fig. 12A embodiment of Choi in order to prevent biasing between different discharge spaces, thereby resulting in uniform plasma discharge [Col. 14 lines 47-55].
PNG
media_image1.png
651
661
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
261
576
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Modified Choi does not specifically disclose wherein the lower electrode is configured to be rotatable.
Lau teaches the lower electrode is configured to be rotatable (the susceptor 206 is rotated during processing) [Fig. 2 & 0032].
Modified Choi and Lau are analogous inventions in the field of substrate treating 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 lower electrode of Modified Choi to be rotatable, as in Lau, to minimize the effect of thermal and process gas flow spatial anomalies within the process chamber and thus facilitate uniform processing of the substrate [Lau - 0032].
Modified Choi (Choi further modified by Lau) does not specifically disclose a lower electrode having an upper surface, on which a substrate is positioned.
Nam teaches a lower electrode (electrostatic chuck 166, which comprises electrode 180) having an upper surface, on which a substrate (substrate 103) is positioned [Fig. 1 & 0004, 0034, 0036].
Modified Choi and Nam are analogous inventions in the field of substrate treating 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 substrate support of Modified Choi to include an electrode to provide ion energy necessary for performing a deposition or other plasma enhanced process, as well as to be able to control plasma characteristics [Nam - 0036, 0037]. Furthermore, the substrate support of Choi can include necessary components for the intended plasma processing on the workpiece substrate [Choi - Col. 22 lines 56-58].
Modified Choi (Choi further modified by Lau and Nam) does not specifically disclose a controller configured to control the gas supply units, wherein the gas supply units include: a first gas supply unit configured to supply the reaction gas to the first discharge space; a second gas supply unit configured to supply the reaction gas to the second discharge space; and a third gas supply unit configured to supply the reaction gas to the third discharge space, and wherein the controller controls the first to third gas supply units such that the reaction gas is independently supplied to the first to third discharge spaces.
Ma teaches a controller (controller 302) configured to perform a control the gas supply units (flange 292 includes flange gas channels to maintain the channels of the gas supply lines 202 and 204; controller 302 can independently control flow through the channels using their respective valves) [Fig. 2, 3, 4 & 0007, 0025, 0031, 0035], each of the gas supply units includes: a first gas supply line configured to supply the reaction gas to the first discharge space; a second gas supply line configured to supply the reaction gas to the second discharge space; and a third gas supply line configured to supply the reaction gas to the third discharge space (first, second, and third gas supply lines are shown in the annotated drawings below; first, second, and third discharge spaces are shown in the same annotated drawings below), and wherein the controller controls the first to third gas supply units such that the reaction gas is independently supplied to the first to third discharge spaces (flange 292 includes flange gas channels to maintain the channels of the gas supply lines 202 and 204; controller 302 can independently control flow through the channels using their respective valves) [Fig. 2, 3, 4 & 0007, 0025, 0031, 0035].
Modified Choi and Ma are analogous inventions in the field of substrate treating 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 apparatus of Modified Choi to include separate gas lines with flow controllers, as in Ma, to allow for independent control of gas flow rates to one or more channels of a gas injection system, which, in turn, can allow for fine tuning of various properties of films deposited using such systems and/or reactant/precursor concentration profiles within a reaction chamber [Ma - 0004].
PNG
media_image4.png
673
627
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Modified Choi (Choi further modified by Nam, Lau, and Ma) does not specifically disclose a surface area of the upper surface of the lower electrode is greater than a surface area bottom surface of the reactor body.
Although Takatsuki does not specifically disclose "a surface area of the upper surface of the lower electrode is greater than a surface area bottom surface of the reactor body," Takatsuki does disclose that lower electrode diameter is a result effective variable. Specifically, the diameter of a lower electrode can be adjusted to change an electric field profile. As such, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum sizing for a lower electrode to obtain a desired electric field profile [Takatsuki - 0105-0106]. It has been held that that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05. Marakhtanov et al. (US 20100252200) also establishes that lower electrode size may be adjusted to change plasma sheathe potential [Marakhtanov - 0009, 0013].
Additionally/alternatively, although Kawano does not specifically disclose "a surface area of the upper surface of the lower electrode is greater than a surface area bottom surface of the reactor body," Kawano does disclose that the area a reactor body occupies is a result effective variable. Specifically, the area a reactor body occupies affects deposition speed and film thickness. As such, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum area occupied for a reactor body to obtain a desired deposition profile [Kawano - 0003-0005]. It has been held that that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05. Arami et al. (US 5958140) also teaches that showerhead size affects process gas profile in a chamber [Arami - Col. 6 lines 55-67, Col. 7 lines 1-17].
Modified Choi (Choi further modified by Nam, Lau, and Ma, and Takatsuki) does not specifically disclose wherein a number of supply ports is corresponding to a number of the discharge spaces.
Although Panagopoulos does not specifically disclose "wherein a number of supply ports is corresponding to a number of the discharge spaces," Panagopoulos does disclose that gas inlet number is a result effective variable. Specifically, Panagopoulos discloses that the number of gas inlets for a showerhead can be adjusted to determine flow and mixing profiles [Panagopoulos - 0019, 0029, 0035, 0039, 0045, 0048, 0049, 0051]. As such, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum number of gas inlets to obtain a desired gas flow profile. It has been held that that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05. Panagapoulos also discloses that utilizing independent gas inlets for respective gas zones would be beneficial for finer control over gas flow [Panagapoulos - 0029, 0035, 0040, 0051]. It would have also been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the supply ports of Modified Choi to correspond to each discharge space since Panagapoulos also discloses that utilizing independent gas inlets for respective gas zones would be beneficial for finer control over gas flow [Panagapoulos - 0035, 0040, 0051]. Gregor et al. (US 20180130640) also disclosed that utilizing gas inlets for respective gas zones would be beneficial to provide finer control over gas distribution [Gregor - 0011]. Chen et al. (US 20050109280) and Long (US 20030084848) also discloses that utilizing a plurality of gas inlets for respective gas zones is a well-known technique in the art [Chen - 0049; Long - 0036].
Regarding Claim 20:
Modified Choi (Choi further modified by Lau and Nam) teaches wherein the second discharge space faces a central area of the substrate positioned on the lower electrode, and wherein the first discharge space and the third discharge space face a peripheral area of the substrate positioned on the lower electrode (as evidenced by Fig. 12A-12B, 29C, 33A-B, and 35-36, if overlayed on substrate 2330, the respective discharge spaces of Modified Choi would correspond to the center and peripheral portions of substrate 2330, respectively) [Choi - Fig. 12A-B, 29C, 33A-B, 35-36 & Col. 14 lines 45-55, Col. 21 lines 14-24, Col. 22 lines 40-50].
Modified Choi does not specifically disclose wherein the controller controls such that a flow rate of the reaction gas supplied to the second discharge space and flow rates of the reaction gas supplied to the first and third discharge spaces are different.
Ma teaches wherein the controller controls such that a flow rate of the reaction gas supplied to the second discharge space and flow rates of the reaction gas supplied to the first and third discharge spaces are different (flange 292 includes flange gas channels to maintain the channels of the gas supply lines 202 and 204; controller 302 can independently control flow through the channels using their respective valves) [Fig. 2, 3, 4 & 0007, 0025, 0031, 0035].
Modified Choi and Ma are analogous inventions in the field of substrate treating 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 apparatus of Modified Choi to include separate gas lines with flow controllers, as in Ma, to allow for independent control of gas flow rates to one or more channels of a gas injection system, which, in turn, can allow for fine tuning of various properties of films deposited using such systems and/or reactant/precursor concentration profiles within a reaction chamber [Ma - 0004].
Response to Arguments
Applicant' s arguments, see Remarks, filed 08/01/2025, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-2, 4-15, and 17-20 under 35 USC 112b have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1-2, 4-15, and 17-20 under 35 USC 112b has been withdrawn. However, in light of the amendments, a new rejection under 35 USC 112a has been set forth herein specifically regarding the limitation “a surface area of the upper surface of the lower electrode is greater than a surface area bottom surface of the reactor body.” This limitation does not have support in the written specification. The specification has not provided specific values for the respective surface areas of the reactor body and lower electrode; the specification has not explicitly disclosed in the written specification that a surface area of the upper surface of the lower electrode is greater than a surface area bottom surface of the reactor body. It is noted that drawings aren't necessarily to scale (See MPEP 2125 II).
Applicant' s arguments, see Remarks, filed 08/01/2025, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-2, 4-15, and 17-20 under 35 USC 103 has been fully considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the combination of references being used in the current rejection. The teachings of Takatsuki et al. (US 20040127033), Marakhtanov et al. (US 20100252200), Kawano et al. (US 20090159432), and Arami et al. (US 5958140) remedy anything lacking in the combination of references as applied above the top amended claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant' s arguments, see Remarks, filed 01/27/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-2, 4, 6-15, and 17-20 under 35 USC 112a have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1-2, 4, 6-15, and 17-20 under 35 USC 112a has been withdrawn.
Applicant' s arguments, see Remarks, filed 01/27/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-2, 4, 6-15, and 17-20 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the combination of references does not specifically disclose “wherein an insulator directly surrounds the upper electrode,” because one of ordinary skill in the art would have no motivation to surround a primary winding with an insulator. The examiner respectfully disagrees as Choi et al. (US 7952048) itself discloses that its insulator (core protecting tube 2130) is made of an electrically insulating material such as quartz or ceramic [Choi - & Col. 16 lines 60-65, Col. 17 lines 32-33]. As such, Choi by itself discloses the aforementioned limitation. One of ordinary skill in the art would not need a reason to modify the core protecting tube 2130 to be comprised of an insulator because Choi itself already discloses that the core protecting tube 2130 can comprise of an insulator (a modification is not needed because the prior art by itself discloses the aforementioned limitation).
Applicant argues that the combination of references does not specifically disclose “wherein the partition walls are nonconductors.” The examiner respectfully disagrees as Choi itself discloses that its partition walls (partitions 2117) are made of the electrically insulating material such as quartz or ceramic [Choi - & Col. 16 lines 60-65, Col. 17 lines 32-33]. As such, Choi by itself discloses the limitation.
Applicant argues that the combination of references does not specifically disclose "wherein a number of supply ports is corresponding to a number of the discharge spaces.” This argument has been fully considered but is moot because the argument does not apply to the combination of references being used in the current rejection. The teachings of Panagopoulos et al. (US 20090236447), Gregor et al. (US 20180130640), Chen et al. (US 20050109280), and Long (US 20030084848) remedy anything lacking in the combination of references as applied above the top amended claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA NATHANIEL PINEDA REYES whose telephone number is (571)272-4693. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM to 4:30 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at (571) 272-5166. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/J.R./Examiner, Art Unit 1718
/GORDON BALDWIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Prosecution Insights