Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/650,133

SUBSTRATE HEATING DEVICE, SUBSTRATE HEATING METHOD, AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING SUBSTRATE HEATER

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 07, 2022
Examiner
ZERVIGON, RUDY
Art Unit
1716
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Tokyo Electron Limited
OA Round
7 (Non-Final)
66%
Grant Probability
Favorable
7-8
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
60%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 66% — above average
66%
Career Allow Rate
691 granted / 1046 resolved
+1.1% vs TC avg
Minimal -6% lift
Without
With
+-6.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
49 currently pending
Career history
1095
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
47.7%
+7.7% vs TC avg
§102
31.7%
-8.3% vs TC avg
§112
15.1%
-24.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1046 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 February 12, 2026 has been entered. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claims 1-3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Sansoni; Steven V. et al. (US 20100039747 A1) in view of, if necessary, Kawakami; Satoru (US 6558508 B1) in view of McMillin; Brian et al. (US 5835334 A). Sansoni teaches a substrate heating device (150+601; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 100; Figure 1) for heating a substrate within a processing container (100; Figure 1) configured to perform processing of a substrate therein, the substrate heating device (150+601; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 100; Figure 1) comprising: a substrate heater (150,502; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 10; Figure 1-”substrate heater”) including a placement surface on which the substrate is placed, the substrate heater (150,502; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 10; Figure 1-”substrate heater”) being configured to heat the substrate placed on the placement surface using a heater (150,502; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 10; Figure 1-”substrate heater”);a jacket (601,607,608; Figure 6B; [0077]-Applicant’s 20; Figure 1) provided to cover a bottom portion of the substrate heater (150,502; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 10; Figure 1-”substrate heater”) via a cooling space (604+632; Figure 6B; [0087]-[0088]-Applicant’s 30; Figure 1); and a cooling gas supplier (141; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 31; Figure 1) configured to supply a cooling gas to the cooling space (604+632; Figure 6B; [0087]-[0088]-Applicant’s 30; Figure 1), wherein the jacket (601,607,608; Figure 6B; [0077]-Applicant’s 20; Figure 1) includes a coolant flow path (160; Figure 6B; [0041]; Applicant’s 21; Figure 1), through which a liquid coolant (142; Figure 6B) flows, formed in the jacket (601,607,608; Figure 6B; [0077]-Applicant’s 20; Figure 1), wherein the coolant flow path (160; Figure 6B; [0041]; Applicant’s 21; Figure 1) is formed separately from the cooling space (604+632; Figure 6B; [0087]-[0088]-Applicant’s 30; Figure 1), and wherein the cooling space (604+632; Figure 6B; [0087]-[0088]-Applicant’s 30; Figure 1) has a stepped shape (step at 604-632 transition; Figure 6B), and wherein the cooling gas supplier (141; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 31; Figure 1) is connected (fluidically via 604; Figure 6B) to the circumferential portion (632; Figure 6B; [0087]-[0088]-Applicants, 30a-c; Figure 1; Applicant’s 2/12/26 remarks) of the cooling space (604+632; Figure 6B; [0087]-[0088]-Applicant’s 30; Figure 1) - claim 1. The above and below italicized claim text is considered intended use recitations for the pending apparatus claims. Further, it has been held that claim language that simply specifies an intended use or field of use for the invention generally will not limit the scope of a claim (Walter , 618 F.2d at 769, 205 USPQ at 409; MPEP 2106). Additionally, in apparatus claims, intended use 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 (In re Casey,152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto , 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); MPEP2115). The term “connection” as claimed is construed by the Examiner as fluid continuity under BRI. Further, Applicant has provided no structural distinction, in the claims, that undermines/redefines the Examiner’s BRI. Applicant’s cooling gas supplier (Applicant’s 31; Figure 1) is clearly shown connected (fluidly) to Applicant’s circumferential portion (Applicants, 30a-c; Figure 1; Applicant’s 2/12/26 remarks) of the cooling space (Applicant’s 30; Figure 1). Kawakami further teaches: The substrate heating device (150+601; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 100; Figure 1) of Claim 1, wherein the processing of the substrate in the processing container (100; Figure 1) is plasma processing (Figure 1), as claimed by claim 2 The substrate heating device (150+601; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 100; Figure 1) of Claim 2, wherein the substrate heater (150,502; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 10; Figure 1-”substrate heater”) includes: a base material (610; Figure 6B; [0086]-Applicant’s 13; Figure 1); and an electrostatic chuck (150,159; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 14; Figure 1) provided on a top surface of the base material (610; Figure 6B; [0086]-Applicant’s 13; Figure 1), the electrostatic chuck (150,159; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 14; Figure 1) including an electrical insulator (“electrically insulating puck base”; [0037]) and an attraction electrode (150,159; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 16; Figure 1) provided inside the electrical insulator (“electrically insulating puck base”; [0037]), the electrostatic chuck (150,159; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 14; Figure 1) being configured to electrostatically attract the substrate to the placement surface by applying a DC voltage (140; Figure 6B) to the attraction electrode (150,159; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 16; Figure 1), as claimed by claim 3 The substrate heating device (150+601; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 100; Figure 1) of Claim 3, wherein the heater (150,502; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 10; Figure 1-”substrate heater”) is provided inside the electrical insulator (“electrically insulating puck base”; [0037]) of the electrostatic chuck (150,159; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 14; Figure 1), as claimed by claim 13 Under anticipation and BRI, Sansoni is believed to further teach a height of a circumferential portion (632; Figure 6B; [0087]-[0088]-Applicants, 30a-c; Figure 1; Applicant’s 2/12/26 remarks) of the cooling space (604+632; Figure 6B; [0087]-[0088]-Applicant’s 30; Figure 1) is higher than a center portion (604; Figure 6B; [0087]-[0088]) of the cooling space (604+632; Figure 6B; [0087]-[0088]-Applicant’s 30; Figure 1). Here, the claimed relative “height” and “higher” is claimed without a reference to a datum. As a result, the Examiner is using a BRI of the claimed invention. Sansoni does not teach wherein Sansoni’s cooling gas supplier (141; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 31; Figure 1) is connected1 to a bottom surface of Sansoni’s circumferential portion (632; Figure 6B; [0087]-[0088]-Applicants, 30a-c; Figure 1; Applicant’s 2/12/26 remarks) of Sansoni’s cooling space (604+632; Figure 6B; [0087]-[0088]-Applicant’s 30; Figure 1), and wherein the cooling gas flows from Sansoni’s circumferential portion (632; Figure 6B; [0087]-[0088]-Applicants, 30a-c; Figure 1; Applicant’s 2/12/26 remarks) to Sansoni’s center portion of Sansoni’s cooling space (604+632; Figure 6B; [0087]-[0088]-Applicant’s 30; Figure 1) - claim 1. McMillin also teaches a wafer support apparatus (100) including a cooling gas supplier (22; Figure 1-Applicant’s 31; Figure 1) is connected2 to a bottom surface of McMillin’s circumferential portion (outer 6a; Figure 1-Applicants, 30a-c; Figure 1; Applicant’s 2/12/26 remarks) of McMillin’s cooling space (6a; Figure 1-Applicant’s 30; Figure 1), and wherein the cooling gas flows from McMillin’s circumferential portion (outer 6a; Figure 1-Applicants, 30a-c; Figure 1; Applicant’s 2/12/26 remarks) to McMillin’s center portion of McMillin’s cooling space (6a; Figure 1-Applicant’s 30; Figure 1). In the event that the Examiner’s grounds for BRI are not accepted, then Kawakami also teaches a cooling space (62,63,64; Figure 7) for backside cooling of a substrate (W) table (6) including a height of circumferential portions (63; Figure 7) of the cooling space (62+63; Figure 7) is higher than a center portion (62,64; Figure 6B; [0087]-[0088]) of the cooling space (62-64; Figure 7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made for Sansoni to add Kawakami’s ventilation pipes (63) to Sansoni cooling space as taught by Kawakami and for Sansoni to add/relocate Sansoni’s coolant piping as taught by McMillin. Motivation for Sansoni to add Kawakami’s ventilation pipes (63) to Sansoni cooling space as taught by Kawakami is for applying an “adjustable thermal resistance” to the cooled components as taught by Kawakami (column 10; lines 40-45). Motivation for Sansoni to add/relocate Sansoni’s coolant piping as taught by McMillin is for “..improving thermal communication between layers” as taught by McMillin (column 3; lines 45-53). Claims 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sansoni; Steven V. et al. (US 20100039747 A1) and, if necessary, Kawakami; Satoru (US 6558508 B1) in view of McMillin; Brian et al. (US 5835334 A) and Watanabe; Toshiya et al. (US 5151845 A). Sansoni, Kawakami and McMillin are discussed above. Sansoni further teaches Sansoni’s heater (150,502; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 10; Figure 1-”substrate heater”) is provided inside Sansoni’s electrical insulator (“electrically insulating puck base”; [0037]) of Sansoni’s electrostatic chuck (150,159; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 14; Figure 1) - claim 5. Sansoni, Kawakami, and McMillin do not teach: the substrate heating device (150+601; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 100; Figure 1) of Claim 3, wherein the electrical insulator (“electrically insulating puck base”; [0037]) and the attraction electrode (150,159; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 16; Figure 1) of the electrostatic chuck (150,159; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 14; Figure 1) are configured as films, as claimed by claim 4 The substrate heating device (150+601; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 100; Figure 1) of Claim 5, wherein the heater (150,502; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 10; Figure 1-”substrate heater”) is configured as a film, as claimed by claim 6 Sansoni’s substrate heating device (150+601; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 100; Figure 1) wherein Sansoni’s base material (610; Figure 6B; [0086]-Applicant’s 13; Figure 1) is made of any of free-cutting ceramics, graphite, aluminum, and copper - claim 7 Watanabe also teaches an electrostatic chuck (all Figures) including wherein the electrical insulator (“insulating films”; column 3; lines 57-63; “ceramic”; column 1; lines 52-55) and the attraction electrode (“electrodes”; column 3; lines 57-63-Applicant’s 16; Figure 1) of the electrostatic chuck (All Figures-Applicant’s 14; Figure 1) are configured as films – “Moreover, the electrodes and insulating films may be fabricated by printing, plasma flame spraying, etching, evaporation, or the like, rather than the green sheet lamination.”. Watanabe further teaches It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made for Sansoni to use film deposited electrical insulator, electrode, and heater as taught by Watanabe. Motivation for Sansoni to use film deposited electrical insulator, electrode, and heater as taught by Watanabe is for alternate economic means for fabricating Sansoni’s chuck components as taught by Watanabe (column 3; lines 57-63) and for improving “the electrostatic force” to “sufficiently attract the object” as taught by Watanabe (column 1; lines 26-33). Claims 8-10, 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sansoni; Steven V. et al. (US 20100039747 A1) and, if necessary, Kawakami; Satoru (US 6558508 B1) and McMillin; Brian et al. (US 5835334 A) in view of Watanabe; Toshiya et al. (US 5151845 A) and further in view of Hirose; Jun et al. (US 20190198298 A1). Sansoni, Kawakami, McMillin and Watanabe are discussed above. Sansoni further teaches: wherein at an outer peripheral portion of a top surface of Sansoni’s jacket (601,607,608; Figure 6B; [0077]-Applicant’s 20; Figure 1), an outer peripheral protrusion (609; Figure 6B) having an annular shape protruding upward is formed to define Sansoni’s cooling space (604+632; Figure 6B; [0087]-[0088]-Applicant’s 30; Figure 1) – claim 9 wherein Sansoni’s jacket (601,607,608; Figure 6B; [0077]-Applicant’s 20; Figure 1) is fixedly bolted (not claimed; [0042],[0079]) to a central portion of Sansoni’s substrate heater (150,502; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 10; Figure 1-”substrate heater”) by a plurality of bolts (not claimed) - claim 10 The substrate heating device (150+601; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 100; Figure 1) of Claim 1, wherein the jacket (601,607,608; Figure 6B; [0077]-Applicant’s 20; Figure 1) includes a shaft (112; Figure 6B) provided to protrude downward from a central portion thereof, and a lower end of the shaft (112; Figure 6B) is installed on a bottom portion (106; Figure 1) of the processing container (100; Figure 1), as claimed by claim 12 Sansoni, Kawakami, McMillin and Watanabe do not teach: Sansoni’s substrate heating device (150+601; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 100; Figure 1) of Claim 7, wherein Sansoni’s substrate heater (150,502; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 10; Figure 1-”substrate heater”) further includes a coating layer provided on a side surface and a bottom surface of Sansoni’s base material (610; Figure 6B; [0086]-Applicant’s 13; Figure 1) and made of a corrosion-resistant material, as claimed by claim 8 a space between Sansoni’s outer peripheral protrusion (609; Figure 6B) and an outer peripheral portion of a bottom surface of Sansoni’s substrate heater (150,502; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 10; Figure 1-”substrate heater”) is hermetically sealed by a seal ring - claim 9 Sansoni and Watanabe do not teach using screws to fix components. Hirose also teaches coating over an ESC (25; Figure 3) heater (52; Figure 3; [0054]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made for Sansoni to coat Sansoni’s heater (150,502; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 10; Figure 1-”substrate heater”) as taught by Hirose, for Sansoni to use screws instead of bolts, and for Sansoni to add additional O-rings. Motivation for Sansoni to coat Sansoni’s heater (150,502; Figure 6B-Applicant’s 10; Figure 1-”substrate heater”) as taught by Hirose is for electrical isolation. Motivation for Sansoni to use screws instead of bolts is for alternate means for securing components. Motivation for Sansoni to add additional O-rings to Sansoni’s interface (638; Figure 6B) is for stopping “leakage” as taught by Sansoni ([0093]). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see pages 9-16, filed February 12, 2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-10 and 12-13 under §102/§103 Sansoni; Steven V. et al. (US 20100039747 A1) in view of, if necessary, Kawakami; Satoru (US 6558508 B1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made under §103 in view of Sansoni; Steven V. et al. (US 20100039747 A1) in view of, if necessary, Kawakami; Satoru (US 6558508 B1) in view of McMillin; Brian et al. (US 5835334 A). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20020036881 A1 and US 20080066676 A1 teach standard ESC apparatus with component coatings. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Rudy Zervigon whose telephone number is (571) 272- 1442. The examiner can normally be reached on a Monday through Thursday schedule from 8am through 6pm EST. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Any Inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the Chemical and Materials Engineering art unit receptionist at (571) 272-1700. If the examiner cannot be reached please contact the examiner's supervisor, Parviz Hassanzadeh, at (571) 272- 1435. 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:/Awww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571) 272-1000. /Rudy Zervigon/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716 1 interpreted as structurally per Applicant’s Figure 1. 2 interpreted as structurally per Applicant’s Figure 1.
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 07, 2022
Application Filed
Apr 04, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jun 13, 2024
Response Filed
Jul 03, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Sep 20, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 07, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 08, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 13, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 12, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 08, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
May 28, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 01, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 10, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 12, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Feb 12, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 15, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601062
MULTI-PORT GAS INJECTION SYSTEM AND REACTOR SYSTEM INCLUDING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597588
INDUCTIVELY COUPLED PLASMA APPARATUS WITH NOVEL FARADAY SHIELD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595562
HEAT TREATMENT APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592363
Actively Controlled gas inject FOR PROCESS Temperature CONTROL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586763
SHOWER HEAD ELECTRODE ASSEMBLY AND PLASMA PROCESSING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
66%
Grant Probability
60%
With Interview (-6.1%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1046 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month