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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species I in the reply filed on November 23, 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the search and examination of the entire application would not place a serious burden on the Examiner. This is not found persuasive because the search and examination of the entire application would place a serious burden on the Examiner since the search required for the features of the elected species is not co-extensive with the search required for the features of the non-elected species.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 9, and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR 2011/0083832) in view of Baera et al. (U.S. 2009/0162261), Iizuka et al. (U.S. 2007/0022954), Kakegawa (U.S. 2015/0129112), Carducci et al. (U.S. 2017/0365443), and Carducci et al. (U.S. 8,876,024).
Referring to Figures 1-2 and paragraphs [0034]-[0045], Lee et al. disclose a showerhead assembly for use in a substrate processing chamber, comprising: a chill plate 110 comprising an integrated gas plate and cooling plate; and a heater plate 132, 160 comprising a first plate.
PNG
media_image1.png
443
862
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Lee et al. is silent of a chill plate comprising a gas plate.
Referring to Figure 8C and paragraph [0081], Baera et al. teach an alternate arrangement wherein a showerhead assembly comprises a chill plate including a gas plate 610 coupled to a cooling plate 230 which is a suitable and conventional arrangement of a showerhead assembly. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the showerhead assembly of Lee et al. a chill plate including a gas plate coupled to a cooling plate as taught by Baera et al. since it is a suitable and conventional arrangement of a showerhead assembly for gas distribution and cooling. Additionally, an express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In re Fout, 675, F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982).
Lee et al. in view of Baera et al. is silent on wherein the gas plate includes an upper portion and a lower portion and the lower portion has an outer diameter greater than the upper portion.
Referring to Figures 1, 25 and paragraphs [0075]-[0076], Iizuka et al. teach a showerhead assembly 40 wherein the gas plate 41 includes an upper portion and a lower portion and the lower portion has an outer diameter greater than the upper portion as a configuration used to mount 41 to the lid 3. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the showerhead assembly of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al. with the gas plate includes an upper portion and a lower portion and the lower portion has an outer diameter greater than the upper portion as taught by Iizuka et al. since it is an alternate configuration used to mount the showerhead assembly to the chamber. Additionally, an express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious (In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982)). Thus, the resulting apparatus of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al. and Iizuka et al. would yield the gas plate includes an upper portion and a lower portion and the lower portion has an outer diameter greater than the upper portion.
Lee et al. is silent on a heater plate comprising a second plate and a third plate.
Referring to Figure 1 and paragraph [0069], Kakegawa teaches a showerhead assembly wherein a heater plate includes a first plate 73, 74, a second plate 71 couple to the first plate, and a third plate 70 coupled to the second plate as a suitable and conventionally known arrangement for a heater plate. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the showerhead assembly of Lee et al. to comprise a second plate and a third plate as taught by Kakegawa since it is a suitable and conventionally known arrangement and material for a heater plate.
Lee et al. in view of Baera et al. and Kakegawa fail to teach an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer disposed therebetween for diffusion bonding the gas plate to the cooling plate; wherein an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer is disposed between the first plate and the cooling plate for diffusion bonding the first plate to the cooling plate; wherein an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer is disposed between the first plate and the second plate for diffusion bonding the first plate to the second plate, and wherein an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer is disposed between the second plate and the third plate for diffusion bonding the second plate to the third plate.
Referring to Figure 9 and paragraph [0052], Carducci et al.’443 teach a showerhead assembly wherein it is conventionally known in the art to provide an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer 144 disposed therebetween for diffusion bonding the base plate 210 to the gas plate 125 as a suitable means to securely mate showerhead plate components and provide more precise temperature control of a showerhead assembly (par.[0004]). Additionally, an express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In re Fout, 675, F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the showerhead assembly of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al. and Kakegawa with an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer disposed therebetween for diffusion bonding between the various showerhead plate components as taught by Carducci et al.’443 since is a suitable means to securely mate showerhead plate components and provide more precise temperature control of a showerhead assembly. The resulting apparatus of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Kakegawa, and Carducci et al.’443 would yield a chill plate comprising a gas plate and a cooling plate having an aluminum- silicon foil interlayer disposed therebetween for diffusion bonding the gas plate to the cooling plate; and a heater plate comprising a first plate, a second plate, and a third plate, wherein an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer is disposed between the first plate and the cooling plate for diffusion bonding the first plate to the cooling plate, wherein an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer is disposed between the first plate and the second plate for diffusion bonding the first plate to the second plate, and wherein an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer is disposed between the second plate and the third plate for diffusion bonding the second plate to the third plate.
Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Kakegawa, and Carducci et al.’443 is silent wherein radially outermost surfaces of the cooling plate and the heater plate taper radially inward from the cooling plate to a bottom of the heater plate.
Referring to Figure 1 and column 3, lines 52-column 4, line 11, Carducci et al.’024 shows a showerhead assembly wherein a wherein radially outermost surfaces of the first plate 126 and the second plate 124 taper radially inward from the first plate to a bottom of the second plate as a showerhead assembly arrangement that mates well with the chamber flange. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the showerhead assembly of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Kakegawa, and Carducci et al.’443 with wherein radially outermost surfaces of the cooling plate and the heater plate taper radially inward from the cooling plate to a bottom of the heater plate as taught by Carducci et al.’024 since it is an alternate and suitable arrangement used to mate with alternate shaped chamber flange.
With respect to claim 9, the showerhead assembly of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al.’024 further includes wherein one or more heating elements are disposed at least partially in the first plate and extend radially outward of the upper portion of the gas plate, and wherein the third plate includes a plurality of plenums having a plurality of walls disposed therein, wherein an open volume of each of the plurality of plenums is larger than a volume of the plurality of walls disposed in each of the plurality of plenums (Lee et al.-Fig. 2, pars.[0037]-[0038], Kakegawa-Fig. 1 and paragraph [0069]).
With respect to claims 2 and 17, the showerhead assembly of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Kakegawa, and Carducci et al.’443 further comprising a top plate 605 (Baera et al.-Fig. 8C-par.[0061]), wherein an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer is disposed between the top plate 605 and the gas plate 610 for diffusion bonding the top plate 605 to the gas plate 610 (Carducci et al.’443-As stated above, it’s obvious to provide an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer disposed between the top plate and the gas plate for diffusion bonding the top plate to the gas plate.- Figure 9 and paragraph [0052]).
With respect to claim 16, Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Kakegawa, and Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al.’024 further includes a process chamber, comprising: a chamber body 2 defining an interior volume therein (Fig. 1., par.[0024]); a substrate support 30 disposed in the interior volume to support a substrate (Fig. 1, par.[0024]); and a showerhead assembly 100 disposed in the interior volume opposite the substrate support (Fig. 1, par. [0024], Note. As stated above, Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al.’024 teach wherein an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer is disposed between a metal lower surface of the second plate and a metal upper surface of the third plate for diffusion bonding the second plate to the third plate); a top plate 605 (Baera et al.-Fig. 8C-par.[0061]). Additionally, as stated above, the resulting apparatus of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al. and Iizuka et al. would yield wherein an outer diameter of the top plate is less than an outer diameter of the chill plate as an alternate configuration for mounting a showerhead assembly to a chamber.
Claim(s) 3 and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR 2011/0083832) in view of Baera et al. (U.S. 2009/0162261), Iizuka et al. (U.S. 2007/0022954), Kakegawa (U.S. 2015/0129112), Carducci et al. (U.S. 2017/0365443), and Carducci et al. (U.S. 8,876,024) as applied to claims 1-2, 9, and 16-17 above, and further in view of Wook et al. (KR 2013/0095119A).
The teachings of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al.’024 have been discussed above. Specifically, with respect to claims 3 and 18, the showerhead assembly of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al.’024 further comprising a bottom plate 615 (Baera et al.-Fig. 8C, par.[0061]), wherein an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer is disposed between the cooling plate 230 and the bottom plate 615 for diffusion bonding the cooling plate 230 to the bottom plate 615 (Carducci et al.’443-As stated above, it’s obvious to provide an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer disposed between the cooling plate and the bottom plate for diffusion bonding the cooling plate to the bottom plate.- Figure 9 and paragraph [0052]).
Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al.’024 is silent of wherein an uppermost surface of the bottom plate is disposed below a lower most surface of the cooling plate.
Referring to Figures 1-4, page 3, paragraph 3, Wook et al. teach a showerhead assembly wherein an uppermost surface of the bottom plate 20 is disposed below a lower most surface of the cooling plate 215 as a suitable arrangement. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the showerhead assembly of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al.’024 such that an uppermost surface of the bottom plate is disposed below a lower most surface of the cooling plate as taught by Wook et al. since it is a suitable arrangement. Additionally, mere arrangement of parts which does not modify the operation of device is prima facie obvious. (In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CC)A 1950). In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
Additionally, as stated above, it’s obvious to provide an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer disposed between the bottom plate and the first plate for diffusion bonding the bottom plate to the first plate (Carducci et al.’443-Figure 9 and paragraph [0052]).
With respect to claim 19, the showerhead assembly of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al, Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, Carducci et al.’024 and Wook et al. further includes wherein an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer is disposed between the bottom plate and the first plate for diffusion bonding the bottom plate to the first plate (Carducci et al.’443-As stated above, it’s obvious to provide an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer disposed between the bottom plate and the first plate for diffusion bonding the bottom plate to the first plate.- Figure 9 and paragraph [0052]).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR 2011/0083832) in view of Baera et al. (U.S. 2009/0162261), Iizuka et al. (U.S. 2007/0022954), Kakegawa (U.S. 2015/0129112), Carducci et al. (U.S. 2017/0365443), and Carducci et al. (U.S. 8,876,024) as applied to claims 1-2, 9, and 16-17 above, and further in view of Singh et al. (U.S. 2010/0116788).
The teachings of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al. (U.S. 2017/0365443), and Carducci et al. (U.S. 8,876,024) have been discussed above.
Carducci et al.’443 teach an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer has a thickness of about 10 mil. Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al.’024 fail to teach wherein the aluminum-silicon foil interlayer has a thickness of about 1 mil to about 9 mil.
Referring to Figure 3 and paragraph [0032], Singh et al. teach it is conventionally known in the art for the aluminum-silicon foil interlayer between chamber components to have a thickness of about 1 mil to about 9 mil to achieve the desired bonding characteristics. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the aluminum-silicon foil layer of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, and Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al.’024 to have a thickness of about 1 mil to about 9 mil as taught by Singh et al. in order to achieve the desired bonding characteristics.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR 2011/0083832) in view of Baera et al. (U.S. 2009/0162261), Iizuka et al. (U.S. 2007/0022954), Kakegawa (U.S. 2015/0129112), Carducci et al. (U.S. 2017/0365443), and Carducci et al. (U.S. 8,876,024) as applied to claims 1-2, 9, and 16-17 above, and further in view of Barron et al. (U.S. 2017/0292402).
The teachings of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al.’024 have been discussed above.
Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al.’024 fail to teach wherein the aluminum-silicon foil interlayer used for diffusion bonding the gas plate to the cooling plate, for diffusion bonding the first plate to the cooling plate, for diffusion bonding the first plate to the second plate, and for diffusion bonding the second plate to the third plate has about 80 weight percent aluminum and about 20 weight percent silicon.
Referring to paragraph [0030], Barron et al. teach that it is conventionally known in the art for an aluminum-silicon foil bond layer to have about 80 weight percent aluminum and about 20 weight percent silicon since it is an optimal composition for bonding. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the aluminum-silicon foil bond layer of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, and Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al.’024 to have about 80 weight percent aluminum and about 20 weight percent silicon as taught by Barron et al. since it is an optimal composition for bonding. Hence, the resulting apparatus of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, Carducci et al.’024, and Barron et al. would yield an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer used for diffusion bonding the gas plate to the cooling plate, for diffusion bonding the first plate to the cooling plate, for diffusion bonding the first plate to the second plate, and for diffusion bonding the second plate to the third plate has about 80 weight percent aluminum and about 20 weight percent silicon.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR 2011/0083832) in view of Baera et al. (U.S. 2009/0162261), Iizuka et al. (U.S. 2007/0022954), Kakegawa (U.S. 2015/0129112), Carducci et al. (U.S. 2017/0365443), Carducci et al. (U.S. 8,876,024), and Barron et al. (U.S. 2017/0292402) as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of May (U.S. 3,614,547).
The teachings of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, Carducci et al.’024, and Barron et al. have been discussed above.
Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, Carducci et al.’024, and Barron et al. fail to teach wherein the aluminum-silicon foil interlayer used for diffusion bonding the gas plate to the cooling plate, for diffusion bonding the first plate to the cooling plate, for diffusion bonding the first plate to the second plate, and for diffusion bonding the second plate to the third plate is at or near a eutectic compound.
Referring column 5, lines 16-18, May teaches wherein an aluminum-silicon foil bond layer is at or near a eutectic compound since it is an optimal composition for bonding. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the aluminum-silicon foil interlayer of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, Carducci et al.’024 and Barron et al. such that it is at or near a eutectic compound as taught by May since it is an optimal composition for bonding.
Claim(s) 7, 11-12, and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR 2011/0083832) in view of Baera et al. (U.S. 2009/0162261), Iizuka et al. (U.S. 2007/0022954), Kakegawa (U.S. 2015/0129112), Carducci et al. (U.S. 2017/0365443), and Carducci et al. (U.S. 8,876,024) as applied to claims 1-2, 9, and 16-17 above, and further in view of Noorbakhsh et al. (U.S. 2011/0162800).
The teachings of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al.’024 have been discussed above. Specifically, the showerhead assembly of Lee et al. further includes wherein the chill plate 110 further comprises a plurality of recursive gas paths 114, 116 disposed therein that are fluidly independent from each other and one or more cooling channels 112 disposed therein, wherein each of the plurality of recursive gas paths is fluidly coupled to a single gas inlet 19 extending to a first side of the chill plate and a plurality of gas outlets 136, 138 extending to a second side of the chill plate, and wherein the heater plate 132, 160 includes one or more heating elements 134 disposed therein, a plurality of first gas distribution holes 136, 138 extending from a top surface thereof that are fluidly independent disposed within the heater plate, the plurality of first gas distribution holes corresponding with the plurality of gas outlets of the chill plate, and a plurality of second gas distribution holes extending from to a lower surface of the heater plate (Lee et al.-Fig. 2).
Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al.’024 fail a plurality of first gas distribution holes 136, 138 extending from a top surface thereof to a plurality of plenums.
Referring to Figure 2 above and paragraphs [0028]-[0032], Noorbakhsh et al.’800 teach that it is conventionally known in the showerhead art to use a plenum 220 as a means for providing one or more gases or gaseous mixtures in the showerhead. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the showerhead assembly of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, Carducci et al.’024 as taught by Noorbakhsh et al. since it is a conventionally known means for providing one or more gases or gaseous mixtures in the showerhead. The resulting apparatus of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, Carducci et al.’024, and Noorbakhsh et al. would yield wherein a plurality of first gas distribution holes extending from a top surface thereof to a plurality of plenums and a plurality of second gas distribution holes extending from the plurality of plenums to a lower surface of the heater plate.
PNG
media_image2.png
615
854
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 11, the showerhead assembly of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, Carducci et al.’024, and Noorbakhsh et al. further includes wherein the gas plate 610 has a first side coupled to a top plate 605 and a second side coupled to the cooling plate 230 (Baera et al.-Fig. 8C and par.[0061]), and a bottom plate 615 coupled to the cooling plate on a side opposite the gas plate (Baera et al.-Fig. 8C and par.[0061]), wherein at least one of the plurality of recursive gas paths 114, 116 is disposed on the first side and the second side of the gas plate, and wherein the one or more cooling channels 112 are disposed in the cooling plate (Lee et al.-Fig. 2).
With respect to claim 12, the showerhead assembly of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, Carducci et al.’024, and Noorbakhsh et al. further include wherein each of the plurality of recursive gas paths 114, 116 have a substantially equal flow path from the single gas inlet to each gas outlet of the plurality of gas outlets 136, 138 (Lee et al.-Fig. 2, par.[0035]).
With respect to claim 14, the showerhead assembly of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, Carducci et al.’024, and Noorbakhsh et al. further includes wherein the first plate 73, 74 has a plurality of channels to accommodate the one or more heating elements, wherein the second plate 71 is coupled to the first plate to cover the plurality of channels, and the third plate 70 is coupled to the second plate on a side opposite the first plate, and wherein the third plate has a second plurality of channels that define the plurality of plenums (Baera et al.-Fig. 1 and par.[0069]).
With respect to claim 15, the showerhead assembly Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, Carducci et al.’024, and Noorbakhsh et al. is silent on wherein the plurality of recursive gas paths include four recursive gas paths and the plurality of plenums includes four plenums to define four gas distribution zones at a lower surface of the showerhead assembly.
Baera et al. teach a plurality of recursive gas paths 416 and a plurality of plenums 422, 442 (Figs. 12-14) and it is an obvious design choice for the plurality of recursive gas paths include four recursive gas paths and the plurality of plenums includes four plenums to define four gas distribution zones at a lower surface of the showerhead assembly since mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza. 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). Therefore, , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the showerhead assembly of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, Carducci et al.’024 and Noorbakhsh et al. with the plurality of recursive gas paths include four recursive gas paths and the plurality of plenums includes four plenums as taught by Baera et al. since it will further provide uniform gas distribution.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR 2011/0083832) in view of Baera et al. (U.S. 2009/0162261), Iizuka et al. (U.S. 2007/0022954), Kakegawa (U.S. 2015/0129112), Carducci et al. (U.S. 2017/0365443), and Carducci et al. (U.S. 8,876,024) as applied to claims 1-2, 9, and 16-17 above, and further in view of Kobayashi (U.S. 2012/0247672).
The showerhead assembly of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al. ‘024 have been discussed above. Lee et al. further comprising an upper electrode 160, 190 coupled to the heater plate 132 and having a plurality of third gas distribution holes 166, 192 extending from a top surface thereof at locations corresponding to locations of the plurality of second gas distribution holes of the heater plate to a lower surface of the upper electrode (Lee et al.-Fig. 2, par.[0038]).
Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al. ‘024 fail to teach a showerhead assembly comprising a first thermal gasket sheet disposed between the chill plate and the heater plate and a second thermal gasket sheet disposed between the heater plate and the upper electrode.
Referring to paragraph [0042], Kobayashi teach it is conventionally known in the art in a showerhead assembly to include first and second thermal gaskets between plates within a showerhead assembly in order to improve heat-transfer efficiency between plates. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the showerhead assembly of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al.’024 with a first thermal gasket sheet disposed between the chill plate and the heater plate and a second thermal gasket sheet disposed between the heater plate and the upper electrode as taught by Kobayashi in order to improve heat-transfer efficiency between plates.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR 2011/0083832) in view of Baera et al. (U.S. 2009/0162261), Iizuka et al. (U.S. 2007/0022954), Kakegawa (U.S. 2015/0129112), Carducci et al. (U.S. 2017/0365443), Carducci et al. (U.S. 8,876,024), and Noorbakhsh et al. (U.S. 2011/0162800) as applied to claims 7, 11-12, and 14-15 above, and further in view of Saito et al. (U.S. 2015/0129112).
The teachings of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, Carducci et al.’024, and Noorbakhsh et al. have been discussed above.
Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, , Carducci et al.’443, Carducci et al.’024, and Noorbakhsh et al. is silent on one or more heating elements of the heater plate define two or more heating zones of the showerhead assembly.
Referring to Figures 1-2A and paragraphs [0038], [0045], Saito et al. teach that it is conventionally known in the art for a heater plate define two or more heating zones 118a, 118b of the showerhead assembly in order to control the showerhead assembly at the desired temperature. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the heater plate of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Iizuka et al., Kakegawa, , Carducci et al.’443, Carducci et al.’024, and Noorbakhsh et al. to define two or more heating zones of the showerhead assembly as taught by Saito et al. in order to control the showerhead assembly at the desired temperature.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR 2011/0083832) in view of Baera et al. (U.S. 2009/0162261), Kakegawa (U.S. 2015/0129112), Carducci et al. (U.S. 2017/0365443), and Carducci et al. (U.S. 8,876,024) as applied to claims 1-2, 9, and 16-17 above, and further in view of Noorbakhsh et al. (U.S. 2021/0032752) or Pettinger et al. (U.S. 9,017,481)
Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Kakegawa, , Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al.’024 further includes a method of manufacture for a showerhead assembly for use in a substrate processing chamber, comprising: providing an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer between a gas plate of a chill plate and a cooling plate of the chill plate and diffusion bonding the gas plate to the cooling plate; providing an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer between a first plate of a heater plate and the cooling plate and diffusion bonding the first plate to the cooling plate; providing an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer between the first plate and a second plate of the heater plate and diffusion bonding the first plate to the second plate; and providing an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer between the second plate and a third plate of the heater plate and diffusion bonding the second plate to the third plate, wherein the first plate, the second plate, and the third plate are made of a same material. (As stated above, Lee et al. in view of Baera et al. and Kakegawa disclose a showerhead assembly comprising a gas plate, a cooling plate, a first plate, a second plate, and a third plate. Furthermore, paragraph [0069], Kakegawa teaches it is obvious for a first plate, a second plate, and a third plate to be made of the same material of aluminum. Carducci et al.-As stated above, it’s obvious to provide an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer disposed between the various plates for diffusion bonding the various plates.- Figure 9 and paragraph [0052]).
Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Kakegawa, , Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al.’024 is silent on wherein the first plate has a plurality of channels disposed along a lower surface thereof to accommodate one or more heating elements and wherein the second plate is coupled to the first plate to cover the plurality of channels.
Referring to Figure 1 and paragraph [0019], Noorbakhsh et al. teach it is conventionally known arrangement for a first plate to have a plurality of channels disposed along a lower surface thereof to accommodate one or more heating elements and wherein the second plate is coupled to the first plate to cover the plurality of channels as a means to dispose the heating elements when using multiple plates since it is easier to manufacture than embedding within a plate. Referring to Figure 13 and column 13, line 38-column 14, line 22, Pettinger et al. teach it is conventionally known arrangement for a first plate to have a plurality of channels disposed along a lower surface thereof to accommodate one or more heating elements and wherein the second plate is coupled to the first plate to cover the plurality of channels as a means to dispose the heating elements when using multiple plates since it is easier to manufacture than embedding within a plate. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the showerhead assembly of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Kakegawa, , Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al.’024 to include a wherein the first plate has a plurality of channels disposed along a lower surface thereof to accommodate one or more heating elements as taught by Noorbakhsh et al. or Pettinger et al. since it is an alternate and suitable means to dispose the heating elements when using multiple plates since it is easier to manufacture than embedding within a plate. The resulting apparatus of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Kakegawa, , Carducci et al.’443, Carducci et al.’024 and Noorbakhsh et al. or Pettinger et al. would yield wherein the first plate has a plurality of channels disposed along a lower surface thereof to accommodate one or more heating elements; wherein the second plate is coupled to the first plate to cover the plurality of channels; and wherein a lower surface of the third plate is a lowermost surface of the heater plate.
Additionally, as stated above in claim 9, the showerhead assembly of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al.’024 further includes wherein one or more heating elements are disposed at least partially in the first plate and extend radially outward of the upper portion of the gas plate, and wherein the third plate includes a plurality of plenums having a plurality of walls disposed therein, wherein an open volume of each of the plurality of plenums is larger than a volume of the plurality of walls disposed in each of the plurality of plenums (Lee et al.-Fig. 2, pars.[0037]-[0038], Kakegawa-Fig. 1 and paragraph [0069]).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 17/028587 in view of Carducci et al. (U.S. 2017/0365443), Carducci et al. (U.S. 8,876,024), and Iizuka et al. (U.S. 2007/0022954).
Claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 17/028587 disclose the claimed limitations except that it fails to teach an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer disposed therebetween for diffusion bonding the gas plate to the cooling plate; wherein an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer is disposed between the first plate and the cooling plate for diffusion bonding the first plate to the cooling plate; wherein an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer is disposed between the first plate and the second plate for diffusion bonding the first plate to the second plate, and wherein an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer is disposed between the second plate and the third plate for diffusion bonding the second plate to the third plate, wherein the first plate, the second plate, and the third plate are made of a same material.
Referring to Figure 9 and paragraph [0052], Carducci et al. teach a showerhead assembly wherein it is conventionally known in the art to provide an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer 144 disposed therebetween for diffusion bonding the base plate 210 to the gas plate 125 as a suitable means to securely mate showerhead plate components and provide more precise temperature control of a showerhead assembly (par.[0004]). Additionally, an express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In re Fout, 675, F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the showerhead assembly of copending Application No. 17/028587 with provide an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer disposed therebetween for diffusion bonding between the various showerhead plate components as taught by Carducci et al. since is a suitable means to securely mate showerhead plate components and provide more precise temperature control of a showerhead assembly. The resulting apparatus of copending Application No. 17/028587 would yield a chill plate comprising a gas plate and a cooling plate having an aluminum- silicon foil interlayer disposed therebetween for diffusion bonding the gas plate to the cooling plate; and a heater plate comprising a first plate, a second plate, and a third plate, wherein an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer is disposed between the first plate and the cooling plate for diffusion bonding the first plate to the cooling plate, wherein an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer is disposed between the first plate and the second plate for diffusion bonding the first plate to the second plate, and wherein an aluminum-silicon foil interlayer is disposed between the second plate and the third plate for diffusion bonding the second plate to the third plate.
copending Application No. 17/028587 is silent on wherein the gas plate includes an upper portion and a lower portion and the lower portion has an outer diameter greater than the upper portion.
Referring to Figures 1, 25 and paragraphs [0075]-[0076], Iizuka et al. teach a showerhead assembly 40 wherein the gas plate 41 includes an upper portion and a lower portion and the lower portion has an outer diameter greater than the upper portion as a configuration used to mount 41 to the lid 3. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the showerhead assembly of copending Application No. 17/028587 in view of Iizuka et al. with the gas plate includes an upper portion and a lower portion and the lower portion has an outer diameter greater than the upper portion as taught by Iizuka et al. since it is an alternate configuration used to mount the showerhead assembly to the chamber. Additionally, an express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious (In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982)). Thus, the resulting apparatus of copending Application No. 17/028587 in view of Iizuka et al. would yield the gas plate includes an upper portion and a lower portion and the lower portion has an outer diameter greater than the upper portion.
copending Application No. 17/028587 is silent wherein radially outermost surfaces of the cooling plate and the heater plate taper radially inward from the cooling plate to a bottom of the heater plate.
Referring to Figure 1 and column 3, lines 52-column 4, line 11, Carducci et al.’024 shows a showerhead assembly wherein a wherein radially outermost surfaces of the first plate 126 and the second plate 124 taper radially inward from the first plate to a bottom of the second plate as a showerhead assembly arrangement that mates well with the chamber flange. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the showerhead assembly of copending Application No. 17/028587 with wherein radially outermost surfaces of the cooling plate and the heater plate taper radially inward from the cooling plate to a bottom of the heater plate as taught by Carducci et al.’024 since it is an alternate and suitable arrangement used to mate with alternate shaped chamber flange.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because new reference Carducci et al.’024 teach wherein radially outermost surfaces of the cooling plate and the heater plate taper radially inward from the cooling plate to a bottom of the heater plate. Additionally, both brazing and diffusion bonding are conventionally known bonding techniques used for chamber components in semiconductor manufacturing. Diffusion bonding is advantageous when the bond requires higher strength, high-temperature durability, corrosion resistance, and hermetic sealing. Therefore, the apparatus of Lee et al. in view of Baera et al., Kakegawa, Carducci et al.’443, and Carducci et al.’024 satisfies the claimed requirements.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Additionally, Lubomirsky et al.’456 teach wherein radially outermost surfaces of the first plate and the second plate taper radially inward from the first plate to a bottom of the second plate.
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 Michelle CROWELL whose telephone number is (571)272-1432. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10:00am-6:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Parviz Hassanzadeh can be reached on 571-272-1435. 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.
/Michelle CROWELL/Examiner, Art Unit 1716
/SYLVIA MACARTHUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716