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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 12/16/2025 has been entered. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 09/12/2025.
Claim Status
Claims 1-10, and 21-30 are pending.
Claims 11-20 are cancelled.
Claims 1, 21, 24-25, and 27-29 are currently amended.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 6, 10, and 28-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sung (US 20190066983 A1), in view of Carducci (US 20200185192 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Sung teaches a chamber liner for a semiconductor process chamber (Sung, Fig. 10, [0090]-[0095], shroud unit 300a), comprising:
an outer sidewall having a first circumference (Sung, Fig. 10, [0090]-[0095], sidewall portion 320);
an inner sidewall having a second circumference less than the first circumference (Sung, Fig. 10, [0090]-[0095], flange portion 310, [0052]); and
a chamber liner fence disposed between the outer sidewall and the inner sidewall (Sung, Fig. 10, [0053], area between sidewall portion 320 and flange portion 310), the chamber liner fence including a first zone comprising at least one first zone opening, a second zone comprising at least one second zone opening, and a third zone comprising at least one third zone opening (Sung, Fig. 10, [0053]-[0058], area between sidewall portion 320 and flange portion 310 include plurality of exhaust holes 340 that span entire circumference of shroud unit 300a).
Sung fails to teach a split door positioned in the outer sidewall;
wherein the first zone is positioned entirely below the split door; and
wherein the first zone and the second zone together span 180° or less of the first circumference.
While Sung teaches a substrate disposed on a support pedestal (Sung, Fig. 1, [0027]), Sung fails to explicitly teach the manner by which the substrate is placed on the pedestal.
However, Carducci teaches a split door positioned in the outer sidewall of the liner assembly (Carducci, Fig. 1, [0027]-[0028], slot 150 is disposed in outer wall 147 of liner assembly 144 in line with slit valve tunnel 141 of chamber 142).
Carducci is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of semiconductor processing. It would have also been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the slot in the outer shroud wall corresponding to the substrate support upper surface in the manner of Carducci to the apparatus of Sung as doing so would allow for the manner of entry and removal of a substrate into/from the substrate support (Carducci, [0028]).
The slot of Carducci spans less than, or at most, 120° and is located in the outer wall of the liner assembly (Carducci, Fig. 3A, [0027]-[0029]). The shroud unit of Sung has a plurality of exhaust holes of the same openings and are arranged with a uniform interval along the circumference of the shroud unit (Sung, Fig. 4, [0053]-[0058]). Therefore, the combination of the slot of Carducci into the shroud unit of Sung is such that the exhaust holes corresponding to the area under the slot (spanning less than, or at most, 120°) can correspond to “the first zone” and “the second zone”, while the exhaust holes not under the slot can correspond to “the third zone”.
Regarding claim 6, Sung teaches an outer flange configured to secure the chamber liner to the semiconductor process chamber (Sung, Fig. 10, [0095], sidewall portion 320 located at the outside of shroud unit 300a is coupled to sealing cover 121).
Regarding claim 10, Sung teaches wherein the inner sidewall is configured to surround an electrode housing bowl of the semiconductor process chamber (Sung, Fig. 10, [0027], shroud unit 300a surrounds, supporting unit 200).
Regarding claim 28, Sung teaches a chamber liner for a semiconductor process chamber (Sung, Fig. 10, [0090]-[0095], shroud unit 300a), comprising:
an outer sidewall having a first circumference (Sung, Fig. 10, [0090]-[0095], sidewall portion 320);
an inner sidewall having a second circumference less than the first circumference (Sung, Fig. 10, [0090]-[0095], flange portion 310, [0052]); and
a chamber liner fence disposed between the outer sidewall and the inner sidewall (Sung, Fig. 10, [0053], area between sidewall portion 320 and flange portion 310), the chamber liner fence including a first zone comprising at least one first zone opening, a second zone comprising at least one second zone opening, and a third zone comprising at least one third zone opening (Sung, Fig. 10, [0053], area between sidewall portion 320 and flange portion 310 include plurality of exhaust holes 340 that span entire circumference of shroud unit 300a)
Sung fails to teach a split door positioned in the outer sidewall;
wherein the first zone is positioned below a center of the split door;
wherein the second zone comprises a first portion and a second portion,
wherein the first zone is positioned between the first portion and the second portion, and
wherein the first zone and the second zone together span 180° or less of the first circumference.
However, Carducci teaches a split door positioned in the outer sidewall of the liner assembly (Carducci, Fig. 1, [0027]-[0028], slot 150 is disposed in outer wall 147 of liner assembly 144 in line with slit valve tunnel 141 of chamber 142).
It would have also been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the slot in the outer shroud wall corresponding to the substrate support upper surface in the manner of Carducci to the apparatus of Sung as doing so would allow for the manner of entry and removal of a substrate into/from the substrate support (Carducci, [0028]).
The slot of Carducci spans less than, or at most, 120° and is located in the outer wall of the liner assembly (Carducci, Fig. 3A, [0027]-[0029]). The shroud unit of Sung has a plurality of exhaust holes of the same openings and are arranged with a uniform interval along the circumference of the shroud unit (Sung, Fig. 4, [0053]-[0056]). Therefore, the combination of the slot of Carducci into the shroud unit of Sung is such that the exhaust holes corresponding to the area under the slot (spanning less than, or at most, 120°) can correspond to “the first zone” and “the second zone”, while the exhaust holes not under the slot can correspond to “the third zone”, where further “the second zone” can be defined as corresponding to two portions on either side of “the first zone”.
Regarding claim 29, Sung fails to teach wherein the second zone is positioned below the split door.
However, Carducci teaches a split door positioned in the outer sidewall of the liner assembly (Carducci, Fig. 1, [0027]-[0028], slot 150 is disposed in outer wall 147 of liner assembly 144 in line with slit valve tunnel 141 of chamber 142).
It would have also been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the slot in the outer shroud wall corresponding to the substrate support upper surface in the manner of Carducci to the apparatus of Sung as doing so would allow for the manner of entry and removal of a substrate into/from the substrate support (Carducci, [0028]).
The slot of Carducci spans less than, or at most, 120° and is located in the outer wall of the liner assembly (Carducci, Fig. 3A, [0027]-[0029]). The shroud unit of Sung has a plurality of exhaust holes of the same openings and are arranged with a uniform interval along the circumference of the shroud unit (Sung, Fig. 4, [0053]-[0056]). Therefore, the combination of the slot of Carducci into the shroud unit of Sung is such that the exhaust holes corresponding to the area under the slot (spanning less than, or at most, 120°) can correspond to “the first zone” and “the second zone”, while the exhaust holes not under the slot can correspond to “the third zone”.
Regarding claim 30, Sung teaches an outer flange configured to secure the chamber liner to the semiconductor process chamber (Sung, Fig. 10, [0095], sidewall portion 320 located at the outside of shroud unit 300a is coupled to sealing cover 121).
Claims 2-5 and 21-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sung (US 20190066983 A1) in view of Carducci (US 20200185192 A1), as applied in claims 1, 6, 10, and 28-30, and further in view of Komiya (US 20030094135 A1).
The limitations of claims 1, 6, 10, and 28-30 are set forth above.
Regarding claim 2, modified Sung fails to teach wherein the at least one first zone opening has a width ax, the at least one second zone opening has a width by, and the at least one third zone opening has a width cz, wherein cz < by ≤ ax.
Komiya is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of semiconductor processing. While Komiya does not explicitly teach the claim limitation above, Komiya teaches the mathematical relationship between the length and width of a rectangular baffle hole and equivalent desired circular hole having a desired conductance (Komiya, Fig. 17, [0211], the equivalent diameter Dh=2ab/(a+b), which is obtained from the length of the rectangle “a” and the width of the rectangle “b”, should be made equal to the diameter of a desired circular hole). The combination of the slot of Carducci into the shroud of Sung would necessitate decreasing the length of the exhaust holes of Sung in the area where the slot now exists. In order to maintain equal conductance in those exhaust holes, one ordinarily skilled in the art, utilizing the mathematical relationship as taught by Komiya above, would calculate the needed increasing of the width of the exhaust hole to compensate for the reduction in length of the exhaust hole. Therefore, the width of the exhaust holes corresponding to the area under the slot, ie “the first zone” and “the second zone”, would be wider than those exhaust holes not corresponding to the area under the slot, ie “the third zone”.
Regarding claim 3, Sung fails to teach a split door positioned in the outer sidewall;
wherein the first zone is positioned entirely below the split door;
wherein the first zone and the second zone together span 180° or less of the first circumference;
wherein the second zone comprises a first portion and a second portion, and
wherein the first zone is positioned between the first portion and the second portion.
However, Carducci teaches a split door positioned in the outer sidewall of the liner assembly (Carducci, Fig. 1, [0027]-[0028], slot 150 is disposed in outer wall 147 of liner assembly 144 in line with slit valve tunnel 141 of chamber 142).
It would have also been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the slot in the outer shroud wall corresponding to the substrate support upper surface in the manner of Carducci to the apparatus of Sung as doing so would allow for the manner of entry and removal of a substrate into/from the substrate support (Carducci, [0028]).
The slot of Carducci spans less than, or at most, 120° and is located in the outer wall of the liner assembly (Carducci, Fig. 3A, [0027]-[0029]). The shroud unit of Sung has a plurality of exhaust holes of the same openings and are arranged with a uniform interval along the circumference of the shroud unit (Sung, Fig. 4, [0053]-[0058]). Therefore, the combination of the slot of Carducci into the shroud unit of Sung is such that the exhaust holes corresponding to the area under the slot (spanning less than, or at most, 120°) can correspond to “the first zone”, and “the second zone”, where further “the second zone” can be defined as corresponding to two portions on either side of “the first zone”.
Regarding claim 4, Sung fails to teach wherein the first zone and the second zone are positioned below the split door.
However, Carducci teaches a split door positioned in the outer sidewall of the liner assembly (Carducci, Fig. 1, [0027]-[0028], slot 150 is disposed in outer wall 147 of liner assembly 144 in line with slit valve tunnel 141 of chamber 142).
It would have also been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the slot in the outer shroud wall corresponding to the substrate support upper surface in the manner of Carducci to the apparatus of Sung as doing so would allow for the manner of entry and removal of a substrate into/from the substrate support (Carducci, [0028]).
The slot of Carducci spans less than, or at most, 120° and is located in the outer wall of the liner assembly (Carducci, Fig. 3A, [0027]-[0029]). The shroud unit of Sung has a plurality of exhaust holes of the same openings and are arranged with a uniform interval along the circumference of the shroud unit (Sung, Fig. 4, [0053]-[0058]). Therefore, the combination of the slot of Carducci into the shroud unit of Sung is such that the exhaust holes corresponding to the area under the slot (spanning less than, or at most, 120°) can correspond to “the first zone” and “the second zone”, while the exhaust holes not under the slot can correspond to “the third zone”.
Regarding claim 5, Sung teaches wherein the widths ax, by, and cz, are within the range of 0.1mm to 100mm (Sung, [0058], widths of exhaust holes in shroud 300 may be larger than 0 mm and smaller than 26mm).
Regarding claim 21, Sung teaches a chamber liner for a semiconductor process chamber (Sung, Fig. 10, [0090]-[0095], shroud unit 300a), comprising:
an outer sidewall having a first circumference (Sung, Fig. 10, [0090]-[0095], sidewall portion 320);
an inner sidewall having a second circumference less than the first circumference (Sung, Fig. 10, [0090]-[0095], flange portion 310, [0052]); and
a chamber liner fence disposed between the outer sidewall and the inner sidewall (Sung, Fig. 10, [0053], area between sidewall portion 320 and flange portion 310), the chamber liner fence including a first zone comprising at least one first zone opening, a second zone comprising at least one second zone opening, and a third zone comprising at least one third zone opening (Sung, Fig. 10, [0053], area between sidewall portion 320 and flange portion 310 include plurality of exhaust holes 340 that span entire circumference of shroud unit 300a).
Sung fails to teach a split door positioned in the outer sidewall;
wherein the first zone is positioned entirely below the split door;
wherein the first zone and the second zone together span 180° or less of the first circumference, and
wherein the at least one first zone opening is greater than the at least one third zone opening.
However, Carducci teaches a split door positioned in the outer sidewall (Carducci, Fig. 1, [0027]-[0028], slot 150 is disposed in outer wall 147 of liner assembly 144).
It would have also been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the slot in the outer shroud wall corresponding to the substrate support upper surface in the manner of Carducci to the apparatus of Sung as doing so would allow for the manner of entry and removal of a substrate into/from the substrate support (Carducci, [0028]).
The slot of Carducci spans less than, or at most, 120° and is located in the outer wall of the liner assembly (Carducci, Fig. 3A, [0027]-[0029]). The shroud unit of Sung has a plurality of exhaust holes of the same openings and are arranged with a uniform interval along the circumference of the shroud unit (Sung, Fig. 4, [0053]-[0058]). Therefore, the combination of the slot of Carducci into the shroud unit of Sung is such that the exhaust holes corresponding to the area under the slot (spanning less than, or at most, 120°) can correspond to “the first zone” and “the second zone”, while the exhaust holes not under the slot can correspond to “the third zone”.
Modified Sung fails to teach wherein the at least one first zone opening is greater than the at least one third zone opening.
While Komiya does not explicitly teach the claim limitation above, Komiya teaches the mathematical relationship between the length and width of a rectangular baffle hole and equivalent desired circular hole having a desired conductance (Komiya, Fig. 17, [0211], the equivalent diameter Dh=2ab/(a+b), which is obtained from the length of the rectangle “a” and the width of the rectangle “b”, should be made equal to the diameter of a desired circular hole). The combination of the slot of Carducci into the shroud of Sung would necessitate decreasing the length of the exhaust holes of Sung in the area where the slot now exists. In order to maintain equal conductance in those exhaust holes, one ordinarily skilled in the art, utilizing the mathematical relationship as taught by Komiya above, would calculate the needed increasing of the width of the exhaust hole. Therefore, the width of the exhaust holes corresponding to the area under the slot, ie “the first zone” and “the second zone”, would be wider than those exhaust holes not corresponding to the area under the slot, ie “the third zone”.
Regarding claim 22, Sung fails to teach wherein the at least one first zone opening has a width ax, the at least one second zone opening has a width by, and the at least one third zone opening has a width cz, wherein cz < by ≤ ax.
While Komiya does not explicitly teach the claim limitation above, Komiya teaches the mathematical relationship between the length and width of a rectangular baffle hole and equivalent desired circular hole having a desired conductance (Komiya, Fig. 17, [0211], the equivalent diameter Dh=2ab/(a+b), which is obtained from the length of the rectangle “a” and the width of the rectangle “b”, should be made equal to the diameter of a desired circular hole). The combination of the slot of Carducci into the shroud of Sung would necessitate decreasing the length of the exhaust holes of Sung in the area where the slot now exists. In order to maintain equal conductance in those exhaust holes, one ordinarily skilled in the art, utilizing the mathematical relationship as taught by Komiya above, would calculate the needed increasing of the width of the exhaust hole. Therefore, the width of the exhaust holes corresponding to the area under the slot, ie “the first zone” and “the second zone”, would be wider than those exhaust holes not corresponding to the area under the slot, ie “the third zone”.
Regarding claim 23, Sung fails to teach a split door positioned in the outer sidewall;
wherein the first zone is positioned entirely below the split door;
wherein the first zone and the second zone together span 180° or less of the first circumference;
wherein the second zone comprises a first portion and a second portion, and
wherein the first zone is positioned between the first portion and the second portion.
However, Carducci teaches a split door positioned in the outer sidewall of the liner assembly (Carducci, Fig. 1, [0027]-[0028], slot 150 is disposed in outer wall 147 of liner assembly 144 in line with slit valve tunnel 141 of chamber 142).
It would have also been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the slot in the outer shroud wall corresponding to the substrate support upper surface in the manner of Carducci to the apparatus of Sung as doing so would allow for the manner of entry and removal of a substrate into/from the substrate support (Carducci, [0028]).
The slot of Carducci spans less than, or at most, 120° and is located in the outer wall of the liner assembly (Carducci, Fig. 3A, [0027]-[0029]). The shroud unit of Sung has a plurality of exhaust holes of the same openings and are arranged with a uniform interval along the circumference of the shroud unit (Sung, Fig. 4, [0053]-[0058]). Therefore, the combination of the slot of Carducci into the shroud unit of Sung is such that the exhaust holes corresponding to the area under the slot (spanning less than, or at most, 120°) can correspond to “the first zone”, and “the second zone”, where further “the second zone” can be defined as corresponding to two portions on either side of “the first zone”.
Regarding claim 24, Sung fails to teach a split door positioned in the outer sidewall;
wherein the first zone is positioned entirely below the split door;
wherein the first zone and the second zone together span 180° or less of the first circumference;
wherein the second zone comprises a first portion and a second portion,
wherein the first zone is positioned between the first portion and the second portion, and
wherein the second zone is positioned below peripheral ends of the split door.
However, Carducci teaches a split door positioned in the outer sidewall of the liner assembly (Carducci, Fig. 1, [0027]-[0028], slot 150 is disposed in outer wall 147 of liner assembly 144 in line with slit valve tunnel 141 of chamber 142).
It would have also been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the slot in the outer shroud wall corresponding to the substrate support upper surface in the manner of Carducci to the apparatus of Sung as doing so would allow for the manner of entry and removal of a substrate into/from the substrate support (Carducci, [0028]).
The slot of Carducci spans less than, or at most, 120° and is located in the outer wall of the liner assembly (Carducci, Fig. 3A, [0027]-[0029]). The shroud unit of Sung has a plurality of exhaust holes of the same openings and are arranged with a uniform interval along the circumference of the shroud unit (Sung, Fig. 4, [0053]-[0058]). Therefore, the combination of the slot of Carducci into the shroud unit of Sung is such that the exhaust holes corresponding to the area under the slot (spanning less than, or at most, 120°) can correspond to “the first zone”, and “the second zone”, where further “the second zone” can be defined as corresponding to two portions on either side of “the first zone”.
Regarding claim 25, Sung teaches wherein the widths ax, by, and cz are within the range of 0.1 mm to 100 mm (Sung, [0058], widths of exhaust holes in shroud 300 may be larger than 0 mm and smaller than 26mm).
Regarding claim 26, Sung teaches an outer flange configured to secure the chamber liner to the semiconductor process chamber (Sung, Fig. 10, [0095], sidewall portion 320 located at the outside of shroud unit 300a is coupled to sealing cover 121).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sung (US 20190066983 A1) in view of Carducci (US 20200185192 A1), as applied in claims 1, 6, 10, and 28-30, and further in view of Pavloff (US 20080178801 A1).
The limitations of claims 1, 6, 10, and 28-30 are set forth above.
Regarding claim 7, modified Sung fails to teach wherein the outer flange further comprises at least one guide hole configured to receive an associated guide of the semiconductor process chamber.
However, Pavloff teaches wherein the outer flange further comprises at least one guide hole configured to receive an associated guide of the semiconductor process chamber (Pavloff, Fig. 3, three plural heads 240 of shield 201 receive pins 230).
Pavloff is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of semiconductor processing. It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the heads as taught by Pavloff into the shroud of Sung as doing so would provide an alignment system for the liner upon reinstallation of the parts into the system with three fixed points of orientation (Pavloff, [0020]).
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sung (US 20190066983 A1) in view of Carducci (US 20200185192 A1) and Komiya (US 20030094135 A1), as applied in claims 2-5 and 21-26, and further in view of Pavloff (US 20080178801 A1).
The limitations of claims 2-5 and 21-26 are set forth above.
Regarding claim 27, modified Sung fails to teach wherein the outer flange further comprises at least one guide hole configured to receive an associated guide of the semiconductor process chamber.
However, Pavloff teaches wherein the outer flange further comprises at least one guide hole configured to receive an associated guide of the semiconductor process chamber (Pavloff, Fig. 3, three plural heads 240 of shield 201 receive pins 230).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the heads as taught by Pavloff into the shroud of Sung as doing so would provide an alignment system for the liner upon reinstallation of the parts into the system with three fixed points of orientation (Pavloff, [0020]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sung (US 20190066983 A1) in view of Carducci (US 20200185192 A1) and Pavloff (US 20080178801 A1), as applied in claim 7, and further in view of Guha (US 20140051253 A1).
The limitations of claim 7 are set forth above.
Regarding claim 8, Sung teaches wherein the inner sidewall, the outer sidewall, the chamber liner fence and the outer flange are formed from silicon or a material including silicon (Sung, [0045], shroud unit 300 may be formed of or include silicon).
Sung fails to teach wherein the inner sidewall, the outer sidewall, the chamber liner fence and the outer flange are anodized aluminum.
However, Guha teaches a baffle ring is formed out of anodized aluminum or silicon carbide (Guha, Fig. 2A, [0031], baffle ring 300).
Guha is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of semiconductor processing. It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have substituted the silicon-containing material of the shroud unit of Sung with anodized aluminum as Guha teaches that silicon carbide and anodized aluminum are equivalents for the same purpose. Sung teaches wherein a shroud unit that is made of conductive material (silicon or silicon including material) has a plurality of exhaust holes for exhausting a process space (Sung, Fig. 10, [0045]). Guha teaches wherein a baffle ring made of conductive material (anodized aluminum or silicon carbide) has slots through which process gas is exhausted from the process space (Guha, Fig. 1, 2C, [0030]-[0032]). See MPEP 2144.06 (II).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sung (US 20190066983 A1) in view of Carducci (US 20200185192 A1), Pavloff (US 20080178801 A1), and Guha (US 20140051253 A1), as applied in claim 8, and further in view of Noorbakhsh (US 20200066493 A1).
The limitations of claim 8 are set forth above.
Regarding claim 9, modified Sung fails to teach wherein the chamber liner is coated with a protective coating.
However, Noorbakhsh teaches wherein the chamber liner is coated with a protective coating (Noorbakhsh, [0038], liners may be coated and/or anodized, where the coating may include yttrium-based coatings).
Noorbakhsh is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of semiconductor processing. It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have constructed the shroud of modified Sung out of anodized aluminum, or coated, in the manner of Noorbakhsh as doing so would help protect against plasma damage and/or corrosion (Noorbakhsh, [0038]).
Response to Arguments
In the Applicant’s response filed 12/16/2025, the Applicant asserts that none of the cited prior art, particularly Kutney in view of Carducci, teach the claim limitations “wherein the first zone is positioned entirely below the split door; and wherein the first zone and the second zone together span 180° or less of the first circumference” of independent claim 1, and similarly claims 21 and 28, as newly amended. In response to the amendments, the Examiner has newly rejected the claims in the “Claims Rejections” sections above, thereby rendering the arguments moot.
In the Applicant’s response filed 12/16/2025, the Applicant asserts that none of the cited prior art, particularly Tanaka, teach the claim limitation “wherein the widths ax, by, and cz, are within the range of 0.1mm to 100mm” of dependent claims 5 and 25. In response to the amendments, the Examiner has newly rejected the claims in the “Claims Rejections” sections above, thereby rendering the arguments moot.
Conclusion
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 TODD M SEOANE whose telephone number is (703)756-4612. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at 571-272-5166. 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.
/TODD M SEOANE/Examiner, Art Unit 1718 /GORDON BALDWIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1718