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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qian et al., US 6,447,636 in view of Wei et al., CN105632860 and Baldwin, Jr. et al., US 6,280,563 or Nakajima, US 6,422,173 or Long et al., US 2012/0322270 or O’Neill et al., US 2017/0053782 and Min et al., KR 2020-0024581.
With respect to independent claim 1, Qian et al. shows the invention substantially as claimed including a plasma etching system, comprising a reaction chamber 101D, a base 107 located in the reaction chamber and used for bearing a workpiece, and a dielectric window 103D/200D located on the reaction chamber, wherein flat plate electrode 220D and coil electrodes 102D/102DD are provided on an outer surface of the dielectric window; the flat plate electrode is located right over the base; the coil electrodes are arranged in a peripheral region of the flat plate electrodes in a surrounding manner; and a Faraday shielding layer 210D is further provided between the coil electrodes and the outer surface of the dielectric window; (see, for example, Fig. 4D and its description, Fig. 4D is shown below).
PNG
media_image1.png
436
392
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Qian et al. does not expressly disclose more than one electrode. Wei et al. discloses a plasma apparatus comprising a reaction chamber 200, a base 25 located in the reaction chamber and used for bearing a workpiece, and a dielectric window 12 located on the reaction chamber, flat plate electrodes 22/32 and coil electrode 21/31 provided on an outer surface of the dielectric window; the flat plate electrodes are located right over the base; the coil electrodes are arranged in a peripheral region of the flat plate electrodes in a surrounding manner; (see, for example, Figs. 4A/6/8 and their descriptions, Fig. 8 is shown below, the Summary of the Invention). It should be noted that Wei et al. clearly discloses embodiments wherein the electrode plate 22/32 is an electrode plate group preferably including two or three electrodes (Summary of the Invention and paragraph 0048).
PNG
media_image2.png
460
452
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the apparatus of Qian et al. as to comprise a group of plate electrodes because such configuration is known and used in the art as a suitable configuration for effectively and efficiently increase the electric field of the region corresponding to the electrode plate group on the pedestal while reducing the magnetic field of the region, thereby improving the plasma density and the plasma processing uniformity.
Qian et al. further discloses a radio frequency power supply 105 coupled to the flat plate electrode and the coil electrodes, and a coupler 222B (on/off switch) coupled to the flat plate electrode which can be used to turn the rf power supplied to the flat electrode on or off (see, for example, Figs. 4D and 5, and their descriptions, especially col. 8-line 60 to col. 9-line 10). Additionally, Qian et al. further discloses that a separate power source can be used to independently supply power to the electrode 220 (see, for example, col. 17, lines 65-67). Qian et al. and Wei et al. do not expressly disclose a radio frequency power supply to supply rf power to the Faraday shield. Baldwin, Jr. et al. discloses a plasma apparatus comprising a coil electrode 36, a Faraday shield 44, a radio frequency power source 46 to couple rf power to the Faraday shield, and a switch 52 to connect or disconnect the Faraday shield to the radio frequency power source (see, for example, Fig. 1 and its description, Fig. 1 is shown below).
PNG
media_image3.png
358
442
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Also, Nakajima discloses a plasma apparatus comprising a coil electrode 117, a Faraday shield 217, and a radio frequency power source 458 to couple rf power to the Faraday shield (see, for example, Fig. 9A and its description, Fig. 9A is shown below).
PNG
media_image4.png
336
523
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Additionally, Long et al. discloses a plasma apparatus comprising a coil electrode 120/122, a Faraday shield 108, and a radio frequency power source 210 to couple rf power to the Faraday shield, (see, for example, Fig. 1 and its description, Fig. 1 is shown below).
PNG
media_image5.png
477
351
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Furthermore, O’Neill et al. discloses a plasma apparatus comprising a coil electrode 110, a Faraday shield 150, and a radio frequency power source 154 to couple rf power to the Faraday shield, (see, for example, Fig. 1 and its description, Fig. 1 is shown below).
PNG
media_image6.png
354
303
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of these disclosures, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the apparatus of Qian et al. modified by Wei et al. as to further comprise a radio frequency power supply to supply power to the Faraday shield because such means is known and used in the art as a suitable means for effectively, efficiently, and independently supply RF power to the Faraday shield in order to achieve a desired process performance, to reduce or eliminate adhesion of contaminants to the inside of the dielectric window, and to increase the versatility of the apparatus, thereby optimizing the apparatus and the methods performed within the apparatus.
With respect to the claimed etching and cleaning processes; when an etching process is performed in the reaction chamber, a radio frequency power of a radio frequency power supply is loaded to the flat plate electrodes and the coil electrodes, and a radio frequency power of a Faraday radio frequency power supply is not loaded to the Faraday shielding layer; when a cleaning process is performed in the reaction chamber, the radio frequency power of the radio frequency power supply is loaded to the flat plate electrodes, the radio frequency power of the Faraday radio frequency power supply is loaded to the Faraday shielding layer, and the radio frequency power of the radio frequency power supply is not loaded to the coil electrodes; and the flat plate electrodes generate a higher bias voltage than the coil electrodes during the etching process; it should be noted that such limitations are directed to method limitations instead of apparatus limitations, and since an apparatus is being claimed as the instant invention, the method teachings are not considered to be the matter at hand, since a variety of methods can be done with the apparatus. The method limitations are viewed as intended uses which do not further limit, and therefore do not patentably distinguish the claimed invention. The apparatus of Qian et al. modified by Wei et al. and Baldwin, Jr. et al. or Nakajima or Long et al. or O’Neill et al., is capable of receiving and introducing the proper gas(es) to perform a desired process such an etching and/or a cleaning process, and is further capable of coupling rf power to the flat electrodes and the coil electrodes while not coupling rf power to the Faraday shield when an etching process is performed, and coupling rf power to the flat electrodes and the Faraday shield while not coupling rf power to the coil electrodes when a cleaning process is performed, and the flat plate electrodes are capable of generating a higher bias voltage than the coil electrodes during the etching process, if the method to be performed within the apparatus requires it.
Regarding the limitations of the flat plate electrodes have a lower inductive resistance than the coil electrodes, and the flat plate electrodes generate a higher bias voltage than the coil electrodes, it should be noted that one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the filing date of the instant claimed invention, would understand that these characteristics are inherent to capacitive plate electrodes and inductive plate electrodes. It is well known in the art that flat capacitive coupling electrodes use a differential in voltage to generate an electric field while inductive coupling coils use eddy currents to generate a magnetic field, and therefore, it is common knowledge in the art that the flat plate electrodes would have a lower inductive resistance than the coil electrodes, and the flat plate electrodes would generate a higher bias voltage than the coil electrodes. Additionally, and this notwithstanding, Min et al. discloses that capacitive coupling plasma generated by a capacitive coupling electrode involves low current and high voltage characteristics while inductive coupling plasma generated by an inductive coil involves high current and low voltage characteristics (see, for example, paragraphs 0074-0075). Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the application that the flat plate electrodes of the apparatus of Qian et al. modified by Wei et al. and Baldwin, Jr. et al. or Nakajima or Long et al. or O’Neill et al., would have a lower inductive resistance than the coil electrodes, and the flat plate electrodes would generate a higher bias voltage than the coil electrodes.
With respect to claim 2, Qian et al. further discloses that the size of the electrode is the same in size as the size of the workpiece but it can also be smaller in size than the size of the workpiece (see, for example, col. 5, lines 55-58). Also, such limitation is directed to an intended use of the apparatus. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. It should be noted that the apparatus of Qian et al. is capable of processing a workpiece that is the same in size as or bigger than the electrode, if the method to be perform in the apparatus requires it. Additionally, expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claims. Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969). Inclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. In re Young, 75 F.2d 966, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963)).
Regarding claims 3-4, it should be noted that the coil electrodes of Qian et al. consist of a plurality of coupled vertical conical coils.
Concerning claim 5, it should be noted that the apparatus of Qian et al. further comprises a radio frequency matcher 121D, and a radio frequency power distribution box; and the radio frequency power of the radio frequency power supply is distributed and connected to the flat plate electrode and the coil electrode by the radio frequency power distribution box through the radio frequency matcher (see, for example, Fig. 4D of Qian et al.).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qian et al., US 6,447,636 in view of Wei et al., CN105632860 and Baldwin, Jr. et al., US 6,280,563 or Nakajima, US 6,422,173 or Long et al., US 2012/0322270 or O’Neill et al., US 2017/0053782 and Min et al., KR 2020-0024581, as applied to claims 1-5, and further in view of Paterson et al., US 2007/0246163.
Qian et al., Wei et al., Baldwin, Jr. et al., Nakajima, Long et al., O’Neill et al., and Min et al., are applied as above, and Qian et al. further discloses that the radio frequency power supply includes a coil rf power supply and a separate flat plate rf power supply, and further discloses the RF matcher 121D (see, for example, Fig. 4D and its description, and col. 17, lines 65-67). Qian et al. Wei et al., Baldwin, Jr. et al., Nakajima, Long et al., O’Neill et al. and Min et al., do not expressly disclose the claimed rf matchers configuration. Paterson et al. discloses a plasma apparatus comprising a coil radio frequency power supply 118/194 and a coil radio frequency matcher 120/196, wherein the radio frequency power of the coil radio frequency power supply is connected to a coil electrode 114a/190,192 through the coil radio frequency matcher; and a flat plate electrode radio frequency power supply 122 and a flat plate radio frequency matcher 124, wherein the radio frequency power of the flat plate electrode radio frequency power supply is connected to a flat plate electrode 116 through the flat plate radio frequency matcher (see, for example Figs. 19 and 24-26, and their descriptions, Fig. 19 is shown below).
PNG
media_image7.png
630
456
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the apparatus of Qian et al. modified by Wei et al. and Baldwin, Jr. et al. or Nakajima or Long et al. or O’Neill et al. and Min et al., as to comprise the claimed plurality of power supplies and radio frequency matchers configuration because such configuration is known and used in the art as a suitable configuration for effectively, efficiently and independently supply and control the power coupled to the electrodes and coils, maximize power transfer, and avoid significant power loss, thereby optimizing the apparatus and the process being performed within the apparatus.
Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al., CN105632860 in view of Qian et al., US 6,447,636 and Baldwin, Jr. et al., US 6,280,563 or Nakajima, US 6,422,173 or Long et al., US 2012/0322270 or O’Neill et al., US 2017/0053782 and Min et al., KR 2020-0024581.
Wei et al. shows the invention substantially as claimed including a plasma etching system, comprising a reaction chamber 200, a base 25 located in the reaction chamber and used for bearing a workpiece, and a dielectric window 12 located on the reaction chamber, wherein flat plate electrodes 22/32 and coil electrode 21/31 are provided on an outer surface of the dielectric window; the flat plate electrodes are located right over the base; the coil electrode is arranged in a peripheral region of the flat plate electrodes in a surrounding manner; (see, for example, Figs. 4A/6/8 and their descriptions, Fig. 8 is shown below, the Summary of the Invention). It should be noted that Wei et al. clearly discloses embodiments wherein the electrode plate 22/32 is an electrode plate group preferably including two or three electrodes (Summary of the Invention and paragraph 0048).
PNG
media_image2.png
460
452
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Wei et al. does not expressly disclose more than one coil electrode. Qian et al. discloses a plasma etching system, comprising a reaction chamber 101D, a base 107 located in the reaction chamber and used for bearing a workpiece, and a dielectric window 103D/200D located on the reaction chamber, a flat plate electrode 220D and coil electrodes 102D/102DD provided on an outer surface of the dielectric window; wherein the flat plate electrode is located right over the base and the coil electrodes are arranged in a peripheral region of the flat plate electrodes in a surrounding manner; (see, for example, Fig. 4D and its description, Fig. 4D is shown below).
PNG
media_image1.png
436
392
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the apparatus of Wei et al. as to comprise plural coil electrodes because such configuration is known and used in the art as a suitable configuration for effectively and efficiently produce a more uniform plasma and thereby optimize the apparatus and the process being performed within the apparatus.
Wei et al. does not expressly disclose the claimed Faraday shielding layer. Qian et al. further discloses the use of a Faraday shielding layer 210D provided between the coil electrodes and the outer surface of the dielectric window; (see, for example, Fig. 4D and its description, Fig. 4 is shown above). Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the apparatus of Wei et al. as to comprise a Faraday shield because such means is known and used in the art as a suitable means for effectively and efficiently for minimizing/suppressing capacitive coupling from the antenna and thereby optimize the apparatus and the method performed within the apparatus.
Qian et al. further discloses a radio frequency power supply 105 coupled to the flat plate electrode and the coil electrodes, and a coupler 222B (on/off switch) coupled to the flat plate electrode which can be used to turn the rf power supplied to the flat electrode on or off (see, for example, Figs. 4D and 5, and their descriptions, especially col. 8-line 60 to col. 9-line 10). Additionally, Qian et al. further discloses that a separate power source can be used to independently supply power to the electrode 220 (see, for example, col. 17, lines 65-67). Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Wei et al. as to comprise a separate RF power supply source coupled to the flat electrode because such configuration is known and used in the art as a suitable configuration to effectively, efficiently, and independently supply and control the RF power supplied to the electrode.
Wei et al. and Qian et al. do not expressly disclose a radio frequency power supply to supply rf power to the Faraday shield. Baldwin, Jr. et al. discloses a plasma apparatus comprising a coil electrode 36, a Faraday shield 44, a radio frequency power source 46 to couple rf power to the Faraday shield, and a switch 52 to connect or disconnect the Faraday shield to the radio frequency power source (see, for example, Fig. 1 and its description, Fig. 1 is shown below).
PNG
media_image3.png
358
442
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Also, Nakajima discloses a plasma apparatus comprising a coil electrode 117, a Faraday shield 217, and a radio frequency power source 458 to couple rf power to the Faraday shield (see, for example, Fig. 9A and its description, Fig. 9A is shown below).
PNG
media_image4.png
336
523
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Additionally, Long et al. discloses a plasma apparatus comprising a coil electrode 120/122, a Faraday shield 108, and a radio frequency power source 210 to couple rf power to the Faraday shield, (see, for example, Fig. 1 and its description, Fig. 1 is shown below).
PNG
media_image5.png
477
351
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Furthermore, O’Neill et al. discloses a plasma apparatus comprising a coil electrode 110, a Faraday shield 150, and a radio frequency power source 154 to couple rf power to the Faraday shield, (see, for example, Fig. 1 and its description, Fig. 1 is shown below).
PNG
media_image6.png
354
303
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of these disclosures, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the apparatus of Wei et al. modified by Qian et al., as to further comprise a radio frequency power supply to supply power to the Faraday shield because such means is known and used in the art as a suitable means for effectively, efficiently, and independently supply RF power to the Faraday shield in order to achieve a desired process performance, to reduce or eliminate adhesion of contaminants to the inside of the dielectric window, and to increase the versatility of the apparatus, thereby optimizing the apparatus and the methods performed within the apparatus.
With respect to the claimed etching and cleaning processes; when an etching process is performed in the reaction chamber, a radio frequency power of a radio frequency power supply is loaded to the flat plate electrodes and the coil electrodes, and a radio frequency power of a Faraday radio frequency power supply is not loaded to the Faraday shielding layer; when a cleaning process is performed in the reaction chamber, the radio frequency power of the radio frequency power supply is loaded to the flat plate electrodes, the radio frequency power of the Faraday radio frequency power supply is loaded to the Faraday shielding layer, and the radio frequency power of the radio frequency power supply is not loaded to the coil electrodes; and the flat plate electrodes generate a higher bias voltage than the coil electrodes during the etching process; it should be noted that such limitations are directed to method limitations instead of apparatus limitations, and since an apparatus is being claimed as the instant invention, the method teachings are not considered to be the matter at hand, since a variety of methods can be done with the apparatus. The method limitations are viewed as intended uses which do not further limit, and therefore do not patentably distinguish the claimed invention. The apparatus of Wei et al. modified by Qian et al. and Baldwin, Jr. et al. or Nakajima or Long et al. or O’Neill et al., is capable of receiving and introducing the proper gas(es) to perform a desired process such an etching and/or a cleaning process, and is further capable of coupling rf power to the flat electrodes and the coil electrodes while not coupling rf power to the Faraday shield when an etching process is performed, and coupling rf power to the flat electrodes and the Faraday shield while not coupling rf power to the coil electrodes when a cleaning process is performed, and the flat plate electrodes are capable of generating a higher bias voltage than the coil electrodes during the etching process, if the method to be performed within the apparatus requires it.
Regarding the limitations of the flat plate electrodes have a lower inductive resistance than the coil electrodes, and the flat plate electrodes generate a higher bias voltage than the coil electrodes, it should be noted that one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the filing date of the instant claimed invention, would understand that these characteristics are inherent to capacitive plate electrodes and inductive plate electrodes. It is well known in the art that flat capacitive coupling electrodes use a differential in voltage to generate an electric field while inductive coupling coils use eddy currents to generate a magnetic field, and therefore, it is common knowledge in the art that the flat plate electrodes would have a lower inductive resistance than the coil electrodes, and the flat plate electrodes would generate a higher bias voltage than the coil electrodes. Additionally, and this notwithstanding, Min et al. discloses that capacitive coupling plasma generated by a capacitive coupling electrode involves low current and high voltage characteristics while inductive coupling plasma generated by an inductive coil involves high current and low voltage characteristics (see, for example, paragraphs 0074-0075). Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the application that the flat plate electrodes of the apparatus of Wei et al. modified by Qian et al. and Baldwin, Jr. et al. or Nakajima or Long et al. or O’Neill et al., would have a lower inductive resistance than the coil electrodes, and the flat plate electrodes would generate a higher bias voltage than the coil electrodes.
With respect to claim 2, Qian et al. further discloses that the size of the electrode is the same in size as the size of the workpiece but it can also be smaller in size than the size of the workpiece (see, for example, col. 5, lines 55-58). Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the apparatus of Wei et al. as to comprise an electrode having the same size or smaller as the workpiece because such configuration is known and used in the art as a suitable configuration to effectively and efficiently generate capacitive coupling plasma over the workpiece and achieve better process uniformity. Also, such limitation is directed to an intended use of the apparatus. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. It should be noted that the apparatus of Wei et al. modified by Qian et al. and Baldwin, Jr. et al. or Nakajima or Long et al. or O’Neill et al. and Min et al., is capable of processing a workpiece that is the same in size as or bigger than the electrode, if the method to be perform in the apparatus requires it. Additionally, expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claims. Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969). Inclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. In re Young, 75 F.2d 966, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963)).
Regarding claims 3-4, it should be noted that the coil electrodes of the apparatus of Wei et al. modified by Qian et al. consists of a plurality of coupled vertical conical coils.
Concerning claim 5, it should be noted that the apparatus of Wei et al. further comprises a radio frequency power supply 24 a radio frequency matcher 23, and a radio frequency power distribution box; and radio frequency power of the radio frequency power supply is distributed and connected to the flat plate electrode and the coil electrode by the radio frequency power distribution box through the radio frequency matcher (see, for example, Figs. 4A/6/8 of Wei et al.).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al., CN105632860 in view of Qian et al., US 6,447,636 and Baldwin, Jr. et al., US 6,280,563 or Nakajima, US 6,422,173 or Long et al., US 2012/0322270 or O’Neill et al., US 2017/0053782 and Min et al., KR 2020-0024581, as applied to claims 1-5, and further in view of Paterson et al., US 2007/0246163.
Wei et al., Qian et al., Baldwin, Jr. et al., Nakajima, Long et al., O’Neill et al. and Min et al. are applied as above and Wei further discloses the radio frequency matcher 23 (see, for example, Figs. 4A/6/8, and their descriptions), and Qian et al. further discloses that the radio frequency power supply includes a coil rf power supply and a separate flat plate rf power supply, and further discloses the RF matcher 121D (see, for example, Fig. 4D and its description, and col. 17, lines 65-67). Qian et al. Wei et al., Baldwin, Jr. et al., Nakajima, Long et al., O’Neill et al. and Min et al. do not expressly disclose the claimed rf matchers configuration. Paterson et al. discloses a plasma apparatus comprising a coil radio frequency power supply 118/194 and a coil radio frequency matcher 120/196, wherein the radio frequency power of the coil radio frequency power supply is connected to a coil electrode 114a/190,192 through the coil radio frequency matcher; and a flat plate electrode radio frequency power supply 122 and a flat plate radio frequency matcher 124, wherein the radio frequency power of the flat plate electrode radio frequency power supply is connected to a flat plate electrode 116 through the flat plate radio frequency matcher (see, for example Figs. 19 and 24-26, and their descriptions, Fig. 19 is shown below).
PNG
media_image7.png
630
456
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the apparatus of Wei et al. modified by Qian et al. and Baldwin, Jr. et al. or Nakajima or Long et al. or O’Neill et al. and Min et al., as to comprise the claimed plurality of power supplies and radio frequency matchers configuration because such configuration is known and used in the art as a suitable configuration for effectively, efficiently and independently supply and control the power coupled to the electrodes and coils, maximize power transfer, and avoid significant power loss, thereby optimizing the apparatus and the process being performed within the apparatus.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the cited references of record do not disclose the newly added limitation to independent claim 1 of “wherein the flat plate electrodes have a lower inductive resistance than the coil electrodes, and the flat plate electrodes generate a higher bias voltage than the coil electrodes”. The examiner respectfully points out that, as stated in the above rejections, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the filing date of the instant claimed invention, would understand that these characteristics are inherent to capacitive plate electrodes and inductive plate electrodes. It is well known in the art that flat capacitive coupling electrodes use a differential in voltage to generate an electric field while inductive coupling coils use eddy currents to generate a magnetic field, and therefore, it is common knowledge in the art that the flat plate electrodes would have a lower inductive resistance than the coil electrodes, and the flat plate electrodes would generate a higher bias voltage than the coil electrodes. Also, new grounds of rejection have been presented over the Min et al. reference. Additionally, it should be noted that applicant, in the last paragraph of page 7 of the response filed on 02/13/2026, clearly acknowledge that these limitations are inherent characteristics and common knowledge of an artisan in the art for flat capacitive electrodes and coil electrodes. Furthermore, and with respect to the flat plate electrodes generating a higher bias voltage than the coil electrodes during the etching process; it should be noted that, as stated in the above rejections, such limitation is directed to a method limitation instead of an apparatus limitation, and since an apparatus is being claimed as the instant invention, the method teachings are not considered to be the matter at hand, since a variety of methods can be done with the apparatus. The method limitations are viewed as intended uses which do not further limit, and therefore do not patentably distinguish the claimed invention. The flat plate electrodes of the apparatus of Qian et al. modified by Wei et al. and Baldwin, Jr. et al. or Nakajima or Long et al. or O’Neill et al. and Min et al., and the flat plate electrodes of the apparatus of Wei et al. modified by Qian et al. and Baldwin, Jr. et al. or Nakajima or Long et al. or O’Neill et al. and Min et al., are capable of generating a higher bias voltage than the coil electrodes during the etching process, if the method to be performed within the apparatus requires it.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. ABE et al. (US 2013/0146563) is cited for its teachings of a plasma apparatus comprising a coil, a Faraday shield, and a RF power supply coupled to the coil and the Faraday shield.
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 LUZ L ALEJANDRO whose telephone number is (571)272-1430. The examiner can normally be reached Monday and Thursday, 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m..
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 at 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.
/LUZ L ALEJANDRO MULERO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
May 6, 2026
Prosecution Insights