DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/17/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 5 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 4780533 B2.
JP 4780533 B2 teaches a method as claimed.
The method comprises:
A passivation step of supplying a passivation gas of supplying a sulfur containing compound (sulfide) to a chamber 2 containing a substrate 6 to form a film 9 on the substrate; and
An adhesion removal step of removal a sulfur containing adhesion 10 adhering onto the inner surface of the chamber 2 by introduction a cleaning gas into the chamber and reacting the adhesion with the cleaning gas.
JP 4780533 B2 teaches that the atmosphere or the atmosphere with added water vapor is used for cleaning. The referenced process is readable on the claimed adhesion removal step because the atmosphere contains the claimed gasses, such as hydrogen, methane and ammonia (which are inherent parts of the atmosphere), which are readable on the claimed cleaning gas.
See at least Figure 1 and the related description and the description at Cleaning operation of film forming apparatus.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 4780533 B2.
JP 4780533 B2 as applied above teaches the claimed method except for the specific recitation of the claimed pressure and temperature.
However, since JP 4780533 B2 does not require any specific requirements to the temperature and to the atmosphere used, it would have been obvious to use atmosphere in the method of JP 4780533 B2 at room temperature (20-22 C) and normal pressure (101 kPa) to reduce the operation coast.
Thus, the claimed pressures and temperatures would be obviously met when the atmosphere at room temperature and normal pressure is used in the method of JP 4780533 B2.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 4780533 B2 in view of JP 2016207789.
JP 4780533 B2 as applied above teaches the claimed method except for the specific recitation of the use of hydrogen sulfide for the deposition of the sulfur containing film.
However, JP 2016207789 teaches that it was known to use hydrogen sulfide for the deposition of the sulfur containing films. See at least an Abstract.
It would have been obvious to an ordinary artisan at the time the invention was filed to utilize hydrogen sulfide for the deposition of the sulfur containing films in the method of JP 4780533 B2 in order to use a known method for its known purpose since JP 2016207789 teaches that it was known to use hydrogen sulfide for the deposition of the sulfur containing films.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 2, 4 and 8 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The following documents have been made of the record:
JP 2018-188339, US 2017/0098550, US 2013/0287664, US 4,622,210.
The prior art applied/cited in the previous Office actions is still considered to be the closest prior art with respect to the amended claims.
The prior art taken alone or in combination fails to teach or fairly suggest a method comprising each and every limitation recited by claim 1.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicants amended claim 1 to recite:
“An adhesion removal method consisting of:
reacting a sulfur-containing adhesion with a cleaning gas consisting of a hydrogen- containing compound gas or consisting of a hydrogen-containing compound gas and an inert gas, wherein the hydrogen-containing compound gas is at least one selected from the group consisting of hydrogen gas, a hydrocarbon gas, and ammonia gas, the sulfur-containing adhesion adhering onto at least one of an inner surface of a chamber and an inner surface of a pipe connected to the chamber, thereby removing the sulfur-containing adhesion”.
The amended claims have been examined.
Claims 1, 2, 4 and 8 have been allowed.
Claims 5, 6, 9 and 11 are rejected.
Please, note that the rejected claims are still written in the open language “comprising”.
Thus, claims do not exclude any other processing steps.
The language of the claims does not exclude any other process conducted at the same time with the step(s) recited by the claims.
The language of the claims does not exclude the process of JP 4780533.
Thus, JP 4780533 B2 teaches the method recited by claims 5 and 11.
Claim 9 is obvious over the teaching of JP 4780533.
Claim 6 is obvious over JP 4780533 B2 in view of JP 2016207789.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER MARKOFF whose telephone number is (571)272-1304. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:30 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, Michael Barr can be reached at 571-272-1414. 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.
/ALEXANDER MARKOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711
Prosecution Insights