DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/21/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicants’ submission, filed on 09/22/2025, in response to claims 1-3, 5, 7-9, 11, 17, 19-21, and 23-26 rejection from the final office action (05/21/2025), by amending claims 1 and 7-8 is entered and will be addressed below.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 12-14 and 18 remain withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Invention Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Interpretation
The “wherein the shaft of the substrate support couples with a hub outside of the semiconductor processing chamber, and wherein the coating extends along the shaft to the hub” of claim 9, as Applicants’ Specification did not disclose the particular feature of hub (e.g. material or function), the hub is considered any connector or anchor of the shaft.
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 19-20 and 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Enman et al. (US 20210032745, hereafter ‘745), in view of Rossman (US 20020146512, hereafter ‘512) and Wu et al. (US 20200181771, hereafter ‘771).
‘745 teaches some limitations of:
Claim 19: FIG. 1 is a sectional view of a processing chamber 100 ([0029]), the processing chamber 100 includes a chamber body 102 and a showerhead 130 ([0030], includes the claimed “A semiconductor processing chamber comprising: a chamber body; a showerhead”);
Examples of chamber components that may include a corrosion resistant film are a substrate support assembly 148, an electrostatic chuck (ESC) ([0029], last sentence), A substrate support assembly 148 is disposed in the interior volume 106 of the processing chamber 100 below the showerhead 130 ([0035], includes the claimed “and a substrate support comprising: a platen characterized by a first surface facing the showerhead, and a shaft coupled with the platen along a second surface of the platen opposite the first surface of the platen, wherein the shaft extends at least partially through the chamber body” shaft is shown in Fig. 1),
A corrosion resistant film, coated on at least a portion of the reduced metal surface, may be conformal ([0005], last sentence), At block 305, the method comprises placing a chamber component into a deposition chamber suited for depositing a corrosion resistant film (Fig. 3, [0056], therefore, the entire upper surface of the substrate support assembly 148 is also coated), at block 340, the method may comprise depositing a corrosion resistant film after the metal oxide of the metal surface has been reduced. The corrosion resistant film may be deposited onto the reduced metal surface by ALD ([0072]), The corrosion resistant film 208 may be adhered to the body 205 such that the interface between the corrosion resistant film and the body are substantially void free … at least about 99.8%, or 100% of the body's surface area that could be exposed to corrosive plasma is adhered continuously to the corrosion resistant film. The term “adhered continuously” refers to a corrosion resistant film that is adhered to the body's surface without any gaps in the interface between the corrosion resistant film and the body's surface ([0052], therefore, all surfaces are coated with corrosion resistant film, includes the claimed “wherein a coating conformally extends about the first surface of the platen, the second surface of the platen, and about the shaft”),
The corrosion resistant film 208 may include … SiC (silicon carbide) … Si3N4 (silicon nitride), … and SiO2 ([0044], includes the claimed “a second layer of a silicon-containing material”),
Suitable thickness for the corrosion resistant film may range from about 1 nm to 1000 μm. In embodiments, the corrosion resistant film may have a maximum thickness of about 750 μm ([0093], includes the claimed “wherein the coating is characterized by a thickness on all coated surfaces of greater than or about 5 μm “).
‘745 does not teach the other limitations of:
Claim 19: wherein the coating comprises an adhesion layer formed on the first surface of the platen, a first layer of silicon formed on the adhesion layer, and (a second layer of a silicon- containing material) overlying the first layer of silicon.
Claim 23: wherein the adhesion layer is less than or about 90 nm thick.
‘512 is an analogous art in the field of high density plasma CVD ([0003], last sentence). ‘512 teaches that a method of depositing an improved seasoning film. In one embodiment the method includes, prior to performing a substrate processing operation, forming a layer of silicon over an interior surface of the substrate processing chamber as opposed to a layer of silicon oxide. In certain embodiments, the layer of silicon comprises at least 70% atomic silicon, is deposited from a high density silane (SinH2n+2) process gas and/or is deposited from a plasma having a density of at least 1x1011 ions/cm3 (abstract), In one embodiment the improved seasoning layer is a silicon film while in another embodiment the improved seasoning layer is a multilayer film having a silicon oxide layer and a silicon layer ([0022]), for the purpose of providing optimal results for decreased devices sizes, ([0005]).
‘771 is an analogous art in the field of a coated article comprises an article adapted for use in a processing chamber, and a coating formed on exterior and interior surfaces of the article (abstract), use high temperatures, high energy plasma, a mixture of corrosive gases, high stress, and combinations thereof. These extreme conditions often result in the erosion of chamber components and the generation of particle contaminants ([0002]), Protective coatings are typically deposited on chamber components ([0003]), the coating is substantially uniform, conformal, and porosity-free ([0004]), The coating may be a rare earth metal-containing layer (e.g., a yttrium-containing oxide layer or a yttrium-containing fluoride layer) ([0019], 2nd sentence, same as ‘745, [0043],[0044]), may include SiO2 ([0032]), FIG. 2A depicts one embodiment of a deposition process 200 in accordance with an ALD technique to grow or deposit a coating on an article (e.g., a heater support, an entire heater assembly, portions of an electrostatic chuck, etc.) ([0048]). ‘771 teaches that The coating may alternatively be a multi-layer coating that includes one or more adhesion layers and one or more ceramic layers ([0019]), If layer 216 is an adhesion layer, the thickness of the adhesion layer may be about 1 nm to about 50 nm, or about 2 nm to about 25 nm, or about 5 nm to about 10 nm ([0056]).
Before the effective filing dates of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have added a silicon layer, as taught by ‘512, between the to the chamber component 205 and the corrosion resistant film 208 of SiO2 of ‘745, further adding an adhesive layer of 5~10 nm (the limitations of 19 and 23), as taught by ‘771, for the purpose of providing optimal results for decreased devices sizes, as taught by ‘512 ([0005]), and for the purpose of improving adhesion, as taught by ‘771 ([0056]).
‘745 further teaches the limitations of:
Claims 20: The corrosion resistant film 208 may include … SiC (silicon carbide) … Si3N4 (silicon nitride), … and SiO2 ([0044], includes the claimed “wherein the second layer of the coating comprises silicon carbide, silicon oxide, silicon nitride, silicon oxycarbide, silicon oxynitride, silicon carbon nitride, or silicon oxycarbonitride”).
The combination of ‘745, ‘512, and ‘771 further teaches the limitations of:
Claim 24: Suitable thickness for the corrosion resistant film may range from about 1 nm to 1000 μm. In embodiments, the corrosion resistant film may have a maximum thickness of about 750 μm (‘745, [0093], this is more than 1000 times of 500 nm, while ‘512 is silent on the thickness ratio of the multiplayer film, but any typical ratio will read into the claimed “wherein the second layer of a silicon-containing material is greater than 500 nm thick”).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘745, ‘512, and ‘771, as being applied to claim 1 rejection above, further in view of Suzuki (US 20130252002, hereafter ‘002).
‘512 is silent on the thickness of either layer of the corrosion resistant film, therefore, silent on the ratio of these two layers. The combination of ‘745, ‘512, and ‘771 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 21: wherein the second layer of the coating comprises greater than or about 75% of an overall thickness of the coating.
First of all, this is merely an engineer choice. Applicants’ Specification [0058] includes a total of eighteen different second layer percentage and there is nothing specific about the advantage of 75% or greater.
Furthermore, ‘002 is an analogous art in the field of GAS BARRIER FILM (title), a gas barrier film, which can exhibit excellent barrier performance under a high-temperature and a high-humidity environment, can be achieved by a gas barrier film including a base; a first barrier layer containing at least silicon, which is laminated on at least one surface of the base; and a second barrier layer containing silicon oxynitride, which is laminated on the first barrier layer ([0020], 2nd sentence), the first barrier layer is formed while the susceptor 24 (Fig. 3, [0062]). ‘002 teaches examples of the thickness ratio of the second barrier layer to the first barrier layer above 75%, and some examples well above 75% in Table I (page 16, barrier film number 4 to 8).
Before the effective filing dates of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have adopted the thickness ratio of the second layer to the first layer at 65% or greater, as taught by ‘002, for its suitability with predictable results. The selection of something based on its known suitability for its intended use has been held to support a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP 2144.07.
Note ‘002 also teaches The coating thickness can be appropriately set according to a purpose as the second barrier layer. For example, the coating thickness is preferably about 1 nm to 100 µm ([0085], last sentence, mostly well above 500 nm of the limitation of claim 24).
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘745, ‘512, and ‘771, as being applied to claim 19 rejection above, further in view of HASHIGUCHI et al. (US 20120247667, hereafter ‘667).
The combination of ‘745, ‘512, and ‘771 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 25: wherein the coating on the first surface of the platen is at least 20% thicker than the coating on the second surface of the platen.
‘667 is an analogous art in the field of PLASMA TREATMENT APPARATUS (title), supporting table 21 functioning as a lower electrode for horizontally supporting a wafer 100 serving as a processing target is arranged in the chamber 11 ([0015]), A coated film (hereinafter referred to as yttria film) containing yttrium oxide particles can be used as the protective film 50 ([0026]). ‘667 teaches that The protective film is formed thicker on the plasma exposed surface than on the side surface of the insulator ring ([0012], last sentence), or instance, the thickness of the protective film 50 of the upper surface section 223 may be 100 µm and the thickness of the protective film 50 of the side surface section 224 may be 50 µm (Fig. 4, [0037], 2nd sentence, 100% more).
Before the effective filing dates of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have adopted twice the thickness of the corrosion resistant film on the upper surface facing plasma than the bottom surface away from the plasma to the substrate support assembly of ‘745, as taught by ‘667, for the purpose of proper protection against plasma erosion, as taught by, as taught by ‘667 ([0012], last sentence).
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘745, ‘512, and ‘771, as being applied to claim 19 rejection above, further in view of Malik et al. (US 20190368035, hereafter ‘035).
The combination of ‘745, ‘512, and ‘771 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 26: wherein the first layer of silicon comprises amorphous silicon.
‘035 is an analogous art in the field of IN-SITU CVD AND ALD COATING OF CHAMBER TO CONTROL METAL CONTAMINATION (title) including plasma ([0012]), subsequent to forming the second protective film, a substrate on a substrate support pedestal ([0007], last sentence). ‘035 teaches that The interior components coated with the protective film include a chamber sidewall, a chamber bottom, a substrate support pedestal, a showerhead, and a chamber top. The protective film can be of various compositions including amorphous Si (abstract, see Fig. 1 for protective film 120).
Before the effective filing dates of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have adopted amorphous Si, as the Si of the multilayer film of ‘512 and then combined with ‘745, as taught by ‘035, for its suitability for protective film with predictable results. The selection of something based on its known suitability for its intended use has been held to support a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP 2144.07.
Claims 1-3 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘745, in view of ‘512, ‘771, and Rossman et al. (US 6121161, hereafter ‘161).
‘745 teaches some limitations of:
Claim 1: FIG. 1 is a sectional view of a processing chamber 100 (e.g., a semiconductor processing chamber) ([0029]), the processing chamber 100 includes a chamber body 102 and a showerhead 130 ([0030], includes the claimed “A semiconductor processing chamber comprising: a chamber body; a showerhead”);
Examples of chamber components that may include a corrosion resistant film are a substrate support assembly 148, an electrostatic chuck (ESC) ([0029], last sentence), A substrate support assembly 148 is disposed in the interior volume 106 of the processing chamber 100 below the showerhead 130 ([0035], includes the claimed “and a substrate support comprising: a platen characterized by a first surface facing the showerhead, and a shaft coupled with the platen along a second surface of the platen opposite the first surface of the platen, wherein the shaft extends at least partially through the chamber body” shaft is shown in Fig. 1),
A corrosion resistant film, coated on at least a portion of the reduced metal surface, may be conformal ([0005], last sentence, includes the claimed “wherein a coating extends conformally about the first surface of the platen”),
FIG. 2 is a sectional view of a coated chamber component 200 … the coated chamber component may comprise a body 205 and a corrosion resistant film 208 ([0037]), The corrosion resistant film 208 may include … SiC (silicon carbide) … Si3N4 (silicon nitride), … and SiO2 ([0044], includes the claimed “a second layer of material”),
Suitable thickness for the corrosion resistant film may range from about 1 nm to 1000 μm. In embodiments, the corrosion resistant film may have a maximum thickness of about 750 μm ([0093], includes the claimed “and wherein the coating is characterized by a thickness on all coated surfaces of greater than or about 1 μm“).
‘745 further teaches that In certain embodiments, the surface of the article to be coated may include a material such as silicon ([0041]).
‘745 does not teach the other limitation of:
Claim 1: and wherein the coating comprises an adhesion layer comprising silicon oxide formed on the first surface of the platen, a first layer of silicon formed on the adhesion layer, and (a second layer of material) overlying the first layer of silicon.
‘512 and ‘771 are analogous arts as discussed above.
‘512 teaches alternating silicon oxide and silicon film, does not expressly teach which is deposited first. This is of limited choice according to KSR. By depositing silicon oxide first, it is considered as an adhesion layer. This is of limited choice by KSR.
Furthermore, ‘161 is an analogous art in the field of Reduction Of Mobile Ion And Metal Contamination In HDP-CVD Chambers Using Chamber Seasoning Film Depositions (title), A method and apparatus for controlling the introduction of contaminates into a deposition chamber that occur naturally within the chamber components. The CVD chamber is "seasoned" with a protective layer after a dry clean operation and before a substrate is introduced into the chamber (abstract). ‘161 teaches that a precursor seasoning layer, such as a silicon oxide layer, is introduced to the chamber before depositing the protective seasoning layer (col. 3, lines 27-30).
Before the effective filing dates of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have replaced the corrosion resistant film 208 of SiO2 of ‘745 with multilayer film having a silicon oxide layer and a silicon layer of ‘512, with silicon oxide layer before depositing the layers, as taught by ‘161, further adding an adhesive layer of 5~10 nm, as taught by ‘771,for the purpose of providing optimal results for decreased devices sizes, as taught by ‘512 ([0005]), for the purpose of improving adhesion, as taught by ‘771 ([0056]), and for the purpose of controlling contaminates, as taught by ‘161 (abstract).
‘745 further teaches the limitations of:
Claims 2-3: The corrosion resistant film 208 may include … SiC (silicon carbide) … Si3N4 (silicon nitride), … and SiO2 ([0044], includes the claimed “wherein the second layer of the coating comprises a silicon-containing material” of claim 2 and “wherein the second layer of the coating comprises silicon carbide, silicon oxide, silicon nitride, silicon oxycarbide, silicon oxynitride, silicon carbon nitride, or silicon oxycarbonitride” of claim 3).
Claim 7: the corrosion resistant film may be crystalline or amorphous and may conformally cover the reduced metal surface and features thereon with a substantially uniform thickness. In one embodiment, the plasma resistant coating has a conformal coverage of the underlying surface that is coated (including coated surface features) with a uniform thickness having a thickness variation of less than about ±20%, a thickness variation of ±10%, a thickness variation of ±5%, or a lower thickness variation when comparing the thickness of the coating at one location to another location ([0050], includes the claimed “wherein the coating across the first surface of the substrate support is characterized by a variation in thickness of less than or about 10%”).
Claim 8: Examples of chamber components that may include a corrosion resistant film are a substrate support assembly 148, an electrostatic chuck (ESC) ([0029], last sentence), the corrosion resistant film may be crystalline or amorphous and may conformally cover the reduced metal surface and features thereon with a substantially uniform thickness. In one embodiment, the plasma resistant coating has a conformal coverage of the underlying surface that is coated (including coated surface features) with a uniform thickness having a thickness variation of less than about ±20%, a thickness variation of ±10%, a thickness variation of ±5%, or a lower thickness variation when comparing the thickness of the coating at one location to another location ([0050], includes the claimed “wherein the first surface comprises a substrate support surface, and the platen comprises an exterior region surrounding the substrate support that is exposed during plasma operations and is characterized by a coating thickness that is at least 10% greater than a coating thickness along the first surface of the platen”).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘745, ‘512, ‘771, and ‘161, as being applied to claim 1 rejection above, further in view of Shoji et al. (US 20130014896, hereafter ‘896).
The combination of ‘745, ‘512, ‘771, and ‘161 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 5: wherein the platen defines a plurality of protrusions extending from the first surface of the platen, and the coating extends about each protrusion of the plurality of protrusions.
‘896 is an analogous art in the field of Wafer-Supporting Device And Method For Producing Same (title), plasma enhanced CVD or ALD ([0004], 3rd sentence). ‘896 teaches that protrusions 11, 11' are disposed in a geometric arrangement throughout the base surface such that each one of the protrusions constitutes a point of each of identical squares formed by the protrusions (Fig. 2A, [0056], 2nd sentence), for the purpose of reducing the number of particles attached to the reverse side of a wafer during film formation ([0007]).
Before the effective filing dates of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have added protrusion of ‘896 to the top surface of the substrate support assembly 148 of ‘745, for the purpose of reducing the number of particles attached to the reverse side of a wafer during film formation, as taught by ‘896 ([0007]). Because the conformal coating 208 on the substrate support assembly 148, the imported protrusion from ‘896 would also have been coated with coating 208.
Claims 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘745, ‘512, ‘771, and ‘161, as being applied to claim 1 rejection above, further in view of Shoji et al. (US 20190185999, hereafter ‘999).
‘745 further teaches some limitations of:
Claim 9: Fig. 1 shows the shaft of the substrate support assembly 148 extends to outside of the chamber, it has to be supported by or connected to a “hub” (includes the claimed “wherein the shaft of the substrate support couples with a hub outside of the semiconductor processing chamber”).
‘745 also teaches that At block 305, the method comprises placing a chamber component into a deposition chamber suited for depositing a corrosion resistant film (Fig. 3, [0056]), at block 340, the method may comprise depositing a corrosion resistant film after the metal oxide of the metal surface has been reduced. The corrosion resistant film may be deposited onto the reduced metal surface by ALD ([0072]). ‘745’s showerhead does not have two plates defines a volume in between.
The combination of ‘745, ‘512, ‘771, and ‘161 does not explicitly teach the limitations of:
Claim 9: and wherein the coating extends along the shaft to the hub.
Claim 11: wherein the showerhead comprises a first plate and a second plate coupled together to define a volume between the first plate and the second plate, and wherein the first plate and the second plate of the showerhead are individually coated with the coating.
‘999 is an analogous art in the field of EX SITU COATING OF CHAMBER COMPONENTS FOR SEMICONDUCTOR PROCESSING (title), a vapor deposition apparatus such as an atomic layer deposition apparatus and/or a chemical vapor deposition apparatus ([0005], last sentence), including plasma ([0010]), After the protective coating is formed, the chamber component is removed from the first reaction chamber and installed in a second reaction chamber. The chamber component serves its intended purpose (e.g., as a showerhead, as a lift pin, as a lift pin retainer, as a substrate support pedestal, etc.) ([0005], 2nd sentence). ‘999 teaches that FIGS. 5A-5C illustrate alternate views of a substrate support pedestal 500 that may be coated with a protective coating using the techniques described herein … The substrate support pedestal 500 includes a body portion 501 having a surface 502 on which a semiconductor wafer is supported during processing … lift pins and lift pin holders (as well as any other separable portions of the substrate support pedestal 500) may be coated together with the rest of the substrate support pedestal 500, or they may be coated separately. In the case where these parts are coated separately, the substrate support pedestal 500 may be assembled after all of the necessary parts are coated. The assembled support pedestal can then be installed in a reaction chamber. The body 501 of the substrate support pedestal 500 is connected to and supported by a stem 503. Certain areas may be masked before the protective coating is formed. For example, any regions where electrical contacts are formed may be masked to ensure that the contacts remain accessible and conductive. Masking of the electrical contact regions (and any other masked regions) is easier where the protective coating is formed ex situ compared to cases where it is formed as an in situ undercoat ([0085], therefore, ex situ coating will cover the whole stem and all surfaces of the body 501), for the purpose of a high quality, highly conformal protective coating ([0048]).
‘999 further teaches that FIGS. 2D-2G show a showerhead that may be coated with a protective coating using the techniques described herein ([0024], Fig. 2E of ‘999 further shows the showerhead includes an upper first plate and a lower second plate with holes, as it is done by ex situ ALD coating, all external surfaces are coated).
Before the effective filing dates of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have adopted ex situ coating of the chamber components, includes showerhead with two plates and the pedestal 500 with stem 503, ALD coating protective coating together or separately, as taught by ’999, as the showerhead 130 and the substrate support assembly 148 of ‘745, for the purpose of a high quality, highly conformal protective coating ([0048]). Note the coating would have had complete coverage by the process of ‘999.
Note ‘999 also clearly coat all surfaces of the pedestal 500.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘745, ‘512, ‘771, and ‘161, as being applied to claim 1 rejection above, further in view of Nakajima et al. (US 6452775, hereafter ‘775).
‘745 is silent on the purity or contamination level of the corrosion resistant film 208. Neither ‘512 addresses this issue. The combination of ‘745, ‘512, ‘771, and ‘161 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 17: wherein the second layer of material is characterized by aluminum trace metal incorporation of less than or about 1010 atoms/cm2.
‘775 is an analogous art in the field of Electrostatic Chuck (title), an inductively coupled plasma etching apparatus (col. 1, lines 15-16). ‘775 teaches that ceramic layer 103, which has a predetermined thickness, is adhered on disk-shaped metal substrate 101 … High purity barrier layer 105 may be formed of any suitable insulative material … e.g., alumina (Al2O3), silicon dioxide (SiO2), silicon nitride (Si3N4), and sapphire (a form of Al2O3). The insulative material from which high purity barrier layer 105 is formed preferably has a purity of at least about 99%, and more preferably a purity of at least about 99.99% (Fig. 5, col. 3, lines 25-46), for the purpose of reducing contaminating backside of the wafer (col. 2, lines 2-4).
Before the effective filing dates of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have adopted a purity of the material of corrosion resistant film 208 of ‘745, at 99.99% pure, as taught by ‘775, for the purpose of reducing contaminating backside of the wafer (col. 2, lines 2-4). Note very high purity corrosion resistant film has little room for all contamination elements, and Aluminum is but one of the many contamination elements.
Response to Argument
Applicant's arguments filed 09/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In regarding to 35 USC 112(b) rejection of claims 7-8, see the upper part of page 7, Applicants amendment overcomes the rejection.
In regarding to 35 USC 103 rejection of claims 19 over ‘Enman ‘745, Rossman ‘512 and Wu ‘771, Applicants argue that ‘771 teaches away from using silicon based layers with its adhesion layer because ‘771 never interposes an element silicon film between the adhesion layer and the protective overcoat, see the middle paragraph of page 8.
This argument is found not persuasive.
Nowhere in ‘771 “criticize, discredit, or otherwise discourage the solution claimed”, see MPEP 2141.01 I.
Currently, ‘771 is relied upon for the thickness of the adhesion layer.
The rejection lacks any articulated motivation with a reasonable expectation of success to use Wu ‘771’s adhesion-layer material together with the claimed silicon layer, see the bridging paragraph between pages 8 and 9.
This argument is found not persuasive.
‘512 teaches a multilayer film having a silicon oxide layer and a silicon layer ([0022]). Either the silicon oxide layer or the silicon layer is directly deposition on the substrate support, which is considered as the adhesion layer. (‘161 is cited for silicon oxide is preferred choice). ‘512 and ‘161 are silent on the thickness of this layer directly on the substrate support. ‘771 is relied upon for the thickness of the adhesion layer. A person of ordinary skill would have clearly expected the success of choosing this thickness, and in the absence of this information, a mere experimental finding.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20180100228 is cited for the conformal protective layer is a plasma resistant rare earth oxide film having a substantially uniform thickness of less than 300 μm (abstract), a 5 micron (μm) coating ([0058]).
US 20060019039 is cited for “Reduction of metal contamination of ion implantation processes is achieved by first depositing a passivation layer on all chamber surfaces prior to performing the ion implantation process. The passivation layer may be a silicon-containing layer such as silicon dioxide, silicon nitride, silicon, silicon carbide …” [0168].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEATH T CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1870. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-5:00 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, 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.
/KEATH T CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716