DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1 and 3-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rohrmann et al (US 2013/0180850) in view of Actor et al (US 5,478,455) and Endo et al (US 8,932,995).
With respect to claim 1, Rohrmann discloses a manufacturing apparatus for semiconductors by sputtering a thin film onto a substrate (e.g. semiconductor manufacturing apparatus) (Abstract; para 0002 and 0015-0017), wherein figs. 1a-b depict the semiconductor manufacturing apparatus comprises: first and second targets [8a],[8b] provided in a vacuum chamber (i.e. claimed “processing chamber”) [1], wherein each of the first and second targets [8a],[8b] is inclined to face the substrate [3] at respective first and second fixed inclination angles with respect to a horizontal plane of the substrate [3] in the processing chamber [1] (para 0015-0016); a substrate support [2] on which the substrate [3] is placed (para 0015); and a first collimator [13a] in front of the first target [8a] and a second collimator [13b] in front of the second target [8b] (para 0019-0020), or alternatively in figs. 2a-b a single collimator [13] in front of the first and second targets [8a],[8b] (para 0019 and 0021).
However Rohrmann is limited in that while sputter deposition is performed based on a recipe for performing film formation, specifics of the recipe controlled via computer are not suggested.
Actor teaches in fig. 1 a semiconductor manufacturing apparatus for forming a film on a substrate or wafer [40] by sputtering a target [70] through a collimator [60] based on a recipe for performing film formation (Abstract; col. 1, lines 6-13; col. 5, lines 62-67; col. 6, lines 1-12), similar to Rohrmann. Actor further teaches a computer “is used to control all aspects of the operation of the sputtering system” to “compensate for the build-up of sputtered material on the collimator and for erosion of the target” to establish an efficient maintenance schedule for replacing the collimator [60] and target [70] (Abstract; col. 3, lines 23-28; col. 8, lines 50-67; col. 9, lines 1-7), the computer having at least one processor to execute programming or instructions stored in memory to cause: storing an adjustment value or factor (i.e. adjustment coefficient) for film thickness (i.e. film quality) based on a recipe (col. 5, lines 62-67; col. 6, lines 1-52), monitoring a life (i.e. used amount) of the target (e.g. Rohrmann’s first or second targets [8a],[8b]) (col. 2, lines 42-56; claim 8), ‘compensate for at least one sputtering parameter’ (i.e. calculate a compensation value for compensating at least one process condition) in the recipe by inputting (via operator) erosion (i.e. usage) of the target (e.g. Rohrmann’s first or second targets [8a],[8b]) and the adjustment coefficient into a calculation formula (col. 3, lines 39-67; col. 5, lines 62-67; col. 6, lines 1-52; claims 8-9), and implementing (i.e. executing) the film formation based on the recipe and compensation value (col. 5, lines 62-67; col. 6, lines 1-52). In addition the claim requirements of “the at least one memory and the instructions are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus to: store at least one adjustment coefficient for adjusting a film quality of a formed film based on the recipe; monitor a used amount of the first target or the second target; calculate a compensation value for compensating at least one of process conditions set in the recipe by inputting the used amount of the first target or the second target and the at least one adjustment coefficient into a calculation formula; and execute film formation based on the recipe and the compensation value” relate to the intended functioning of the claimed semiconductor manufacturing apparatus, at least on process, and at least one memory, with the semiconductor manufacturing apparatus, computer, at least one processor, and memory of Actor fully capable of functioning in claimed manner on Rohrmann’s first or second targets [8a],[8b] as taught at Actor’s col. 3, lines 39-67; col. 5, lines 62-67; col. 6, lines 1-52. Actor further teaches the adjustment coefficient is a coefficient of a polynomial equation that is an order of 3 or greater (col. 3, lines 52-67; col. 6, lines 35-52; claims 2-4), which includes a quadratic function (e.g. bx2+ax+1). Actor also discloses the computer, at least one processor, and memory uses the erosion or age (i.e. used amount) of the target (e.g. Rohrmann’s first or second targets [8a],[8b]) as a variable of the quadratic equation to then calculate the compensation value using the quadratic equation (col. 3, lines 39-67; col. 5, lines 62-67; col. 6, lines 1-52; claims 8-9 and 11). In addition the claim requirement of “the at least one memory and the instructions are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus to use the used amount of the target as a variable of the quadratic function and calculate the compensation value using the calculation formula of the quadratic function” relates to the intended functioning of the claimed semiconductor manufacturing apparatus, at least on process, and at least one memory, with the semiconductor manufacturing apparatus, computer, at least one processor, and memory of Actor fully capable of functioning in claimed manner on Rohrmann’s first or second targets [8a],[8b] as taught at Actor’s col. 3, lines 39-67; col. 5, lines 62-67; col. 6, lines 1-52; claims 8-9 and 11.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the computer and recipe of Actor for controlling the sputter deposition of each the first and second targets [8a],[8b] of Rohrmann to gain the advantages of compensating for both build-up of sputtered material on the collimator(s) [13a],[13b],[13] and the erosion of each of the first or second targets [8a],[8b] to establish an efficient maintenance schedule for replacing of the collimator(s) [13a],[13b],[13] and first and second targets [8a],[8b].
However the combination of references Rohrmann and Actor is further limited in that the substrate support [2] of Rohrmann or wafer platform (i.e. claimed “substrate support”) [30] of Actor being movable up and down to adjust a distance between the first and second targets [8a],[8b] and the substrate [3] is not suggested.
Endo teaches in figs. 1A and 3 semiconductor manufacturing apparatus for forming a film on a substrate or wafer [108] by sputtering first and second targets [140] attached to deposition guns or process heads [114] through at least one aperture [112] in a shield [110] (e.g. a collimator [110],[112]) (Abstract; col. 1, lines 16-39; col. 4, lines 42-50; col. 5, lines 10-28; col. 7, lines 25-36; col. 8, lines 4-13), similar to Rohrmann. Endo further teaches in figs. 1A and 3 the first and second targets [140] on the process heads [114] are tilted (i.e. inclined) towards the at least one aperture [112] to further enhance uniformity of a layer deposited through the at least one aperture [112] (col. 6, lines 1-12), and the substrate [108] is on a substrate support [106] that is moveable in a vertical direction (e.g. up and down) (col. 4, lines 34-41), wherein moving the substrate [108] up and down allows for “depositions rate will decrease with the increase in target to substrate distance” (e.g. the substrate moving up and down adjusts a distance between the first and second targets [140] on the process heads [114], which then adjusts deposition rates of the first and second targets [140] onto the substrate [108]) (col. 7, lines 37-67; col. 8, lines 1-3). The claim requirement of “a substrate support on which the substrate is placed and that is movable upward and downward to adjust a first distance between the first target and the substrate while the first fixed inclination angle of the first target is maintained constant and to adjust a second distance between the second target and the substrate while the second fixed inclination angle of the second target is maintained constant, thereby changing a first incident angle of first sputtered particles sputtered from the first target with respect to the substrate and changing a second incident angle of second sputtered particles sputtered from the second target with respect to the substrate” relates to the intended use of the claimed substrate support, with the substrate support [106] and substrate [108] fully capable of operating in the claimed manner by moving the substrate [108] up and down while the first and second targets [140] are each tilted (i.e. inclined) at respective fixed inclination angles that are each maintained constant.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art have the substrate support [2] and substrate [3] of modified Rohrmann configured to move up and down to adjust the distance between the first and second targets and substrate support as taught by Endo to gain the advantage of adjusting deposition rates from the first and second targets [8a],[8b] onto the substrate [3].
With respect to claim 3, Actor further teaches the quadratic function is an equation for calculating the compensation value of deposition rate (i.e. film formation time) in the recipe in response to the adjustment coefficient and age (i.e. used amount) of the target (e.g. Rohrmann’s first target [8a]) (col. 3, lines 52-67; col. 5, lines 62-67; col. 6, lines 30-52; claims 2-4), wherein the computer, at least one processor, and memory compensates the film formation time in the recipe by calculating the compensation value of the film formation time while using the used amount of the target (e.g. Rohrmann’s first target [8a]) as the variable of the quadratic function (col. 5, lines 62-67; col. 6, lines 1-52), and then the computer, at least one processor, and memory executes the film formation time that has been compensated (col. 5, lines 62-67). In addition the claim requirements of “the at least one memory and the instructions are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus to: compensate the film formation time set in the recipe by calculating the compensation value of the film formation time while using the used amount of the first target as the variable of the quadratic function and execute film formation using a compensated film formation time” relate to the intended functioning of the claimed semiconductor manufacturing apparatus, at least on process, and at least one memory, with the semiconductor manufacturing apparatus, computer, at least one processor, and memory of Actor fully capable of functioning on Rohrmann’s first target [8a] in the claimed manner as taught at Actor’s col. 3, lines 52-67; col. 5, lines 62-67; col. 6, lines 1-52; claims 2-4, 8-9, and 11.
With respect to claim 4, Actor further teaches the quadratic function is an equation for calculating the compensation value of an input power to a plasma generation power source in the recipe in response to the adjustment coefficient and age (i.e. used amount) of the target (e.g. Rohrmann’s first target [8a]) (col. 3, lines 52-67; col. 5, lines 62-67; col. 6, lines 4-52; claims 2-4 and 8-10), wherein the computer, at least one processor, and memory compensates input power in the recipe by calculating the compensation value of the input power while using the used amount of the target (e.g. Rohrmann’s first target [8a]) as the variable of the quadratic function (col. 5, lines 62-67; col. 6, lines 1-52; claims 2-4 and 8-10), and then the computer, at least one processor, and memory executes film formation with the input power that has been compensated (col. 5, lines 62-67). In addition the claim requirements of “the at least one memory and the instructions are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus to: compensate the input power set in the recipe by calculating the compensation value of the input power while using the used amount of the first target as the variable of the quadratic function and execute film formation using a compensated input power” relate to the intended functioning of the claimed semiconductor manufacturing apparatus, at least on process, and at least one memory, with the semiconductor manufacturing apparatus, computer, at least one processor, and memory of Actor fully capable of functioning on Rohrmann’s first target [8a] in the claimed manner as taught at Actor’s col. 3, lines 52-67; col. 5, lines 62-67; col. 6, lines 1-52; claims 2-4, 8-10.
With respect to claims 5-7, the combination of references Rohrmann, Actor, and Endo has: Actor teaching the quadratic function is the equation for calculating the compensation value of in the recipe in response to the adjustment coefficient and age (i.e. used amount) of the target (col. 3, lines 52-67; col. 4, lines 23-27; col. 5, lines 62-67; col. 6, lines 4-52; claims 2-4 and 8-10), with Endo teaching the compensation value is the distance between the first and second targets [140] and the substrate support [106] (col. 7, lines 37-67; col. 8, lines 1-3), wherein the computer, at least one processor, and memory of Actor calculates the compensation value (of the distance taught by Endo) while using the used amount of the target (e.g. Rohrmann’s first target [8a]) as the variable of the quadratic function (Actor, col. 5, lines 62-67, col. 6, lines 1-52, claims 2-4 and 8-10), and then the computer, at least one processor, and memory executes film formation based on the compensation value of the distance (Actor, col. 5, lines 62-67; Endo, col. 7, lines 37-67; col. 8, lines 1-3). In addition the claim requirements of “the at least one memory and the instructions are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus to: compensate the distance between the first target and the substrate support in the recipe by calculating the compensation value of the distance between the first target and the substrate support while using the used amount of the first target as the variable of the quadratic function and execute film formation using a compensated distance between the first target and the substrate support” relate to the intended functioning of the claimed semiconductor manufacturing apparatus, at least on process, and at least one memory, with the semiconductor manufacturing apparatus, computer, at least one processor, and memory of Actor on Rohrmann’s first target [8a] at Actor’s col. 3, lines 52-67, col. 5, lines 62-67, col. 6, lines 1-52, claims 2-4, 8-10, and Endo at col. 7, lines 37-67; col. 8, lines 1-3.
With respect to claims 8 and 9, Actor further teaches the adjustment value or factor (i.e. adjustment coefficient) is prepared for at least one process module where the target (e.g. Rohrmann’s first target [8a]) is disposed and prepared (col. 4, lines 55-67; col. 5, lines 62-67; col. 6, lines 1-52).
With respect to claims 10-13, Actor further teaches a list of adjustment values or factors (i.e. adjustment coefficients) is displayed on a computer screen (i.e. recipe screen) that displays conditions of the recipe for a system operator, wherein the adjustment coefficient to be used for film formation is selected from the list (col. 3, lines 39-67; col. 5, lines 62-67; col. 6, lines 1-12; claims 8-12).
With respect to claim 14, Actor further teaches a list of adjustment values or factors (i.e. adjustment coefficients) is displayed on a computer screen (i.e. recipe screen) that displays conditions of the recipe for a system operator, wherein the adjustment coefficient to be used for film formation is selected from the list (col. 3, lines 39-67col. 5, lines 62-67; col. 6, lines 1-12; claims 8-12).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s Remarks on p. 9-15 filed 1/21/2026 are addressed below.
112 Rejections
As per interview summary mailed 1/8/2026, support for previously amended claim 1 was discussed to be sufficient at para 0058 of the published Specification (US 2023/0026807); the previous 112(a) rejection has been withdrawn.
As per interview summary mailed 1/8/2026, claims 5-7 have each been amended to provide antecedent basis; the previous 112(b) rejections have been withdrawn.
103 Rejections
Applicant’s arguments on p. 11-15 with respect to amended claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new combination of references Rohrmann, Actor, and Endo being applied in the current rejection.
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 MICHAEL A BAND whose telephone number is (571)272-9815. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 9am-5pm EST.
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, James Lin can be reached at (571) 272-8902. 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.
/MICHAEL A BAND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794