DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-9, 11, 13-16 and 18-21 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Frankel et al (US 2001/0054387) in view Zhao et al (US 5,968,379) and Kaushal et al (US 2005/0167514).
With respect to claims 1 and 13, Frankel shows the method claimed including a heater assembly (25) with a heating surface that is heated to a predetermined temperature profile (see steps 580-584; also, see para 0087), a controller (50) for emitting a stimulus (i.e., gas) at the heating surface, and a control system (153) of the controller receiving stimulus (gas) information (para 0084-0086; Figure 1D) wherein Frankel further discloses for a disturbance of the temperature of the heater that is calculated or corrected using an algorithm that estimates/calculates an amount of power to maintain the desired temperature given an amount and type of gas flow (para 0089). Frankel further discloses for receiving the stimulus information as the controller/processor (50) controls a valve (280) for a timing or when the stimulus (e.g., gas) is to be introduced or dispersed in the processing chamber (para 0068) where the heater assembly is located. But, Frankel does not explicitly disclose the stimulus (gas) emitted has a temperature different than the heating surface and causes the disturbance, and the heating assembly having a plurality of heating elements wherein the control system calculates an anticipated disturbance to the predetermined temperature profile and controlling the plurality of heating elements when the stimulus occurs to maintain the predetermined profile to compensate for the disturbance as claimed.
Zhao discloses it is known to provide a stimulus such as gas that is emitted to a heating surface of a heater wherein the gas causes a disturbance to a predetermined temperature of the heating surface as the gas cools down the heater (column 35, lines 22-33) wherein such gas would have a temperature different than that of the heater for the heater to cool down. Zhao further discloses a control system that receives the stimulus/gas information including gas flows and temperature via a process selector (161; also, see column 15, lines 28-43).
Kaushal shows it is known in the art to provide a heater assembly having a plurality of heating elements (235) that are known to be independently controlled to maintain a desired temperature profile (para 0052) based on various inputs and disturbances including gas information/stimulus (para 0049 and 0081; also, see Figure 9). Kaushal further shows a controller that can predict or anticipate thermal response based on the data it receives (para 0049) and calculate intelligent setpoints (which are used for controlling the heating elements) to establish a desired temperature profile. Also, see para 0076 and Figure 16.
In view of Zhao and Kaushal, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt Frankel with the controller that controls stimulus (i.e., gas) including emitting and receiving the stimulus information that has a temperature different from than that of the heater surface to adjust power to the heater assembly to compensate disturbances or temperature variations when the stimulus occurs (i.e., cooling down of the heater or its heating surface when gas is applied) and due to the stimulus emitted to the heater assembly wherein the desired predetermined temperature profile or uniform heat distribution of the heater assembly would be predictably maintained by adjusting the power to effectively and uniformly heated an object (e.g., wafer or substrate) supported on the heater as the controller predicts or anticipates a disturbance to the temperature profile of the heating surface/heater assembly based on the stimulus information when the stimulus occurs and adjusts the heating powers of the heater elements to maintain the desired/uniform temperature.
With respect to claims 2 and 17, Frankel shows the controller that includes a gas controller (163) that controls the gas composition and flow rates wherein gas is supplied through a gas shower head (20) proximate the heater (25).
With respect to claim 3, Kaushal shows the controller that can predict or anticipate thermal response based on the data it receives (para 0049) and calculate intelligent setpoints (which are used for controlling the heating elements) wherein it would allow the controller of Frankel, as modified by Zhao and Kaushal, to predict or anticipate the disturbance to the temperature profile of the heating surface/heater assembly based on the stimulus information and adjust the heating powers of the heater elements to maintain the desired/uniform temperature.
With respect to claims 4 and 16, Frankel discloses the stimulus information includes an amount and type of gas flow (para 0089), and Zhao discloses for timing of the gas to be injected (e.g., 15 seconds after the wafer is loaded; column 35, line 34-37).
With respect to claims 5 and 15, Frankel shows the heater unit or heater assembly as modified by Kaushal disposed in a processing chamber wherein the gas controller controls the injection/supply of the gas into the chamber.
With respect to claim 6, Frankel shows adjusting power based on the stimulus information (para 0089) wherein the disturbance or temperature variations would be offset or reduced to maintain the desired temperature profile uniform.
With respect to claims 7, 18 and 19, Frankel shows the control system that is in electrical communication with the heater unit/assembly for controlling its operation with the stimulus information and a control for controlling the stimulus/gas as illustrated in Figure 1D of Frankel. Kaushal also shows the control system that is in electrical communication with the heater assembly and the controller as illustrated in Figure 2.
With respect to claims 8, 9 and 14, Kaushal shows the heating elements that are independently controlled wherein power to the heating elements is also independently/differently controlled (para 0053 and 0054) based on a dynamic model that includes the stimulus information (gas flow/rate) wherein such independently controlled heating elements would allow more accurate controls of separate regions of the heater assembly which would predictably and effectively offset or reduce the disturbance or temperature variations to maintain the desired/uniform temperature.
With respect to claims 11 and 20, Kaushal shows the control system can provide a closed-loop control for the heater assembly (para 0087-0088) wherein such closed-loop would allow Frankel to continuously monitor and adjust the heater unit/assembly as necessary to maintain the desired heating temperature profile.
With respect to claim 21, Frankel shows receiving the stimulus information as the controller/processor (50) controls a valve (280) for a timing or when the stimulus (e.g., gas) is to be introduced or dispersed in the processing chamber (para 0068) where the heater assembly is located.
Claim 12 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Frankel in view of Zhao and Kaushal as applied to claims 1-9, 11, 13-16 and 18-21 above, and further in view of Morioka et al (US 2008/0142501) and Sandhu et al (US 5,196,353).
Frankel in view of Zhao and Kaushal shows the method claimed except for a video camera for imaging of the heating surface.
Morioka shows it is known to provide a camera (infrared camera) for taking images of a heating surface of a heater assembly that shows a temperature distribution of the heating surface. Also, see para 0051.
Sandhu shows it is known to provide a thermal/temperature sensor including an infrared camera that senses thermal image of an object/wafer which includes continuous (i.e., video) thermal scanning (column 6, lines 6-21).
In view of Morioka and Sandhu, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt Frankel, as modified by Zhao and Kaushal, with the video camera for taking and sending thermal images of a specific heating zone of the heater assembly which is influenced by the stimulus as known in Zhao to the control system as a feedback data to control and update the power delivered to the heating elements (also see para 0089) to predictably maintain the uniform temperature profile as desired by the user.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/12/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the applied art does not show the claimed invention including the claim recitation of calculating, by the control system, an anticipated disturbance to the predetermined temperature profile based on the stimulus information and controlling the plurality of heating elements when the stimulus occurs based on the calculated anticipate disturbances as claimed in claims 1 and 13 wherein claim 13 further recites for the timing of the stimulus to be injected. Applicant further argues that reliance on Zhao and Kaushal does not remedy shortcoming of Frankel wherein Zhao is silent as to calculate an anticipated disturbances as claimed and Kaushal does not teach or suggest calculating an anticipated disturbances as claimed.
It is noted that Zhao is applied to show how a stimulus such as gas which is emitted to a heating surface of a heater causes a disturbance wherein Kaushal is further applied to a controller that can predict or anticipated thermal response based on the data including gas information/stimulus and calculate intelligent set points which are used to control heating elements to achieve a desired temperature profile. As Frankel shows gas as the stimulus that is emitted onto the heating surface as shown by Zhao, the effects or disturbances caused by the gas would be predicted or anticipated as taught by Kaushal wherein the control system of Frankel would be modified as taught by Zhao and Kaushal to control the plurality of heating elements to maintain the desired temperature profile including uniform heating profile to effectively meet the desired application of the heater assembly.
With regard to the timing of the stimulus that is to be injected, it is noted Frankel discloses for the controller/processor (50) that controls a valve (280) when the stimulus (e.g., gas) is to be introduced or dispersed in the processing chamber (para 0068).
Thus, the Applicant’s arguments are not deemed persuasive.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 SANG Y PAIK whose telephone number is (571)272-4783. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:30; M-F.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at 571-272-9059. 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.
/SANG Y PAIK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761