DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
Claims 1-5 and 8-15 are pending.
Claims 6-7 are cancelled.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 30 April 2026 has been entered.
Status of Objections and Rejections
The previous grounds of rejection are withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment.
New grounds of rejection are necessitated by amendment.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrasing of “a film thickness measuring…plating current” (lines 8-10) appears to be newly added without proper markups. The phrasing also appears to be newly added at lines 22-24. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-5 and 8-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the term “reference” in “configured to detect a reference” is indefinite because it is unclear what is being referred to with the term reference. It is unclear if the reference is a reference potential, a predetermined value or some other scenario.
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 8-12 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stahl et al. (US 2015/0008132), in view of Birang et al. (US 2011/0031112) and in view of Reid (KR 20160132140).
Regarding claim 1, Stahl discloses an electrochemical deposition device (title) (= a plating apparatus) comprising:
A plating chamber (10) [0050] (Figure 4) (= a plating tank);
A substrate as the working electrode (11) intrinsically held by a support [0050] (= a substrate holder that holds a substrate);
Anode (12) facing the substrate [0043] (= an anode disposed, in the plating tank, facing the substrate held by the substrate holder);
One or more reference electrodes being analyzed to provide an output signal fingerprint which is represented as the potential difference as a function of time or the input power of a process power supply to provide input energy in the form of current and/or potential between the working electrode(s) and a counter electrode (abstract) (= a measuring module including a plurality of sensors that detect a parameter related to a plating film formed on a surface to be plated of the substrate),
One reference electrode (13) positioned between the substrate and the anode (Figure 4) and in another embodiment a reference electrode position outside the area between the substrate and the anode (Figures 6 and 8) (= wherein the plurality of sensors includes at least one first potential sensor disposed at a first position between the substrate and the anode, an a second potential sensor disposed at a second position in the plating tank and configured to detect a reference having substantially no potential variation, and the film thickness measuring module measuring a potential different between the first position and the second position and estimating a plating current at the first position based on a potential difference between the first position and the second position). Stahl discloses the device for monitoring and controlling the quality of plating processes including bath composition, state of hardware readiness and fingerprint of the processing of the product (substrate) using electrolytic deposition [0001]. Stahl discloses the positioning of sensors in multiple embodiments, however, the combination of the locations of the reference electrodes would have been an obvious engineering design choice to measure voltages at various, multiple locations. Stahl discloses that the system may be presented in a more complex manner [0060].
Stahl fails to disclose the claimed resistor.
In the same or similar field of plating devices, Reid discloses a plating apparatus comprising an ionic resistor (119) to mitigate or eliminate the end effect when plating metal layers [0015], [0076] located between the substrate (107) and anode (115). Reid discloses that the resistor shapes the electrolyte current near the wafer to provide a relatively uniform current distribution on the wafer surface [0077].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to produce an apparatus comprising a resistor because Reid discloses that a resistor positioned between a substrate and anode provides uniform current distribution over the whole wafer and thereby produces a uniform deposit.
Stahl and Reid fail to explicitly disclose the reference electrodes for measuring a film thickness.
Birang discloses an electroplating plating cell (300, abstract) comprising a fluid basin assembly (301) [0050], a contact ring (314) supporting a substrate (315) [0050], an anode (305) within the basin assembly (Figure 3) [0050], a diffusion plate (310) or collimator (312) which channels electric field and operates to resistively damp electrical variations [0046], [0050], a sensor assembly (330) comprising an array of sensors (331) disposed in the plating cell wherein the voltage level between sensors is sensed and real time thickness profile can be generated by integrating current values associated with the differential voltages, a difference in voltage is equal to zero [0051], [0059], Figure 3. Birang discloses the device for improving uniformity and yield performance based on the real time monitoring of potential differences and calculating current densities (abstract).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to produce a device comprising sensors that measure film thickness based on the electroplating parameters such as current and potential differences. Regarding the claimed “estimating a plating current”, the phrasing does not further structurally limit the claimed device. The computer with programmable capabilities of Birang for example is capable of performing such calculating, estimating, determining, etc. [0051].
Regarding claim 2, Birang discloses adjusting the localized intensity of electric field or one or more other process parameters based on the real time thickness profile [0013], [0051], [0069].
Regarding claim 8, Birang discloses measuring the voltage between sensors to estimate local current density [0059].
Regarding claim 9, Birang discloses estimating the local current density as described above [0059]. Birang does not specifically indicate that the estimation would include film thickness distribution, however, since Birang discloses using the current density to determine the real-time thickness, it would have been obvious to utilize the estimated current density and/or current density to estimate the film thickness distribution.
Regarding claim 10, Birang discloses head rotation as a processing variable [0073]. The head being the substrate support.
Regarding claim 11, Stahl discloses the sensors located at an outer edge to an inner circumference of the substrate. Birang discloses wherein a plurality of first potential sensors (331) are provided from an outer circumference to an inner circumference of the substrate (Figure 3a-e, 330, 331).
Regarding claim 12, Birgan discloses wherein a plurality of the first potential sensors (331) are provided along an outer edge of the substrate (Figure 3a-e, 330, 331).
Regarding claim 14, Birang discloses wherein the substrate holder is configured to hold the substrate with the surface to be plated being oriented downward in the plating tank (Figure 2 and other Figures).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stahl et al. (US 2015/0008132) in view of Birang et al. (US 2011/0031112) and in view of Reid (KR 20160132140) and in further view of Wang (CN 211142201).
Regarding claim 3, Stahl in view of Reid and Birang fails to disclose a shielding body that is movable as claimed. Reid discloses one or more shields (149, 151).
In the same or similar field of an electroplating apparatus [0002], Wang discloses a shielding plate used to shield part of the electric lines at the edge of a wafer for improving the thickness uniformity of the entire wafer [0006]-[0008]. Wang discloses the shielding plate comprising arc portions for providing variable shielding area for improving versatility [0014]. The shielding plate (1) of Wang includes hollow arc portions (12) and corresponding shielding plates (2) (Figure 2). As shown in Figure 4, the shielding plates (2) are located in a retreated position and are adjusted as needed to provide the desired electric field by being driven over the hollow portions (12) to a shielding position [0067]-[0074].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to produce an apparatus comprising a shielding plate because Wang discloses that an adjustable shielding plate provides improved thickness uniformity by adjusting the position of arc shield plates about the surface of a wafer. The teachings of Stahl, Reid and Birang disclose wherein the plating condition adjustment module adjusts a position of the shielding body as the adjustment of the plating condition since Birang teaches adjusting the parameters of the electroplating process based on the real-time calculated thickness. It would have been obvious to adjust the electric field of Stahl in view of Reid and Birang with the shielding plate of Wang for controlling the electroplating process parameter (i.e. electric field profile).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stahl et al. (US 2015/0008132), in view of Birang et al. (US 2011/0031112), in view of Reid (KR 20160132140) and in further view of Mayer et al. (US 6,964,792).
Regarding claim 4, Stahl in view of Reid and Birang fails to disclose a drive mechanism to change a distance between the substrate and the resistor.
In the same or similar field of electroplating, Mayer discloses adjusting the separation distance between a diffuser membrane and the workpiece such that the plating uniformity ultimately benefits from the uniform flow emanating therefrom (Col. 5 line 60 – Col. 6 line 5).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to produce an apparatus comprising a drive mechanism to change a distance between the substrate and the resistor because Mayer teaches that the separation between the diffuser membrane and the workpiece is adjusted to improve electroplating uniformity. The membrane of Mayer is similar to the membrane of Mayer (e.g. ceramic or glass plates).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stahl et al. (US 2015/0008132), in view of Birang et al. (US 2011/0031112), in view of Reid (KR 20160132140) and in further view of Yamasaki et al. (US 2019/0093250).
Regarding claim 5, Stahl in view of Reid and Birang fails to disclose an anode mask as claimed. Reid discloses one or more shields (149) positioned with the anode (113) (Figure 5).
Yamasaki discloses a plating apparatus comprising an anode mask (300) for adjusting the electric field between the anode electrode and the substrate [0062]. Yamasaki discloses wherein the anode mask has an opening portion that is adjustable [0071]-[0072], Figure 5.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to produce an apparatus comprising an anode mask because Yamasaki discloses an anode mask with adjustable opening area for controlling the electric field to the substrate. The teachings of Stahl in view of Reid, Birang and Yamasaki disclose wherein the plating condition adjustment module changes the opening dimension of the anode mask as the adjustment of the plating conditions since Birang teaches adjusting the parameters of the electroplating process based on the real-time calculated thickness. It would have been obvious to adjust the electric field of Stahl in view of Reid and Birang with the anode mask of Yamasaki for controlling the electroplating process parameter (i.e. electric field profile).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stahl et al. (US 2015/0008132), in view of Birang et al. (US 2011/0031112), in view of Reid (KR 20160132140) and in further view of Ohashi et al. (US 2019/0301044).
Regarding claim 13, Stahl in view of Reid and Birang fails to disclose wherein the film thickness measuring module is configured to move the first potential sensor along a plate surface of the substrate during the plating treatment.
In the same or similar field of plating (title), Ohashi discloses four film thickness measuring parts (108) including sensors which are movable when considering the following factors such as the number of portions requiring the film thickness measurement and the frequency of measurement [0099]. Ohashi discloses a sensor supporting plate with sensor drive parts for movement of the film thickness measuring parts [0112].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to produce an apparatus comprising moving first potential sensor because Ohashi discloses that film thickness measuring sensors are movable depending on the sizing and frequency of measurement. Moreover, movability is not sufficient by itself to patentably distinguish over an otherwise old device unless there are new or unexpected results (MPEP § 2144.04 VA).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stahl et al. (US 2015/0008132,) in view of Birang et al. (US 2011/0031112), in view of Reid (KR 20160132140) and in further view of Wang et al. (CN 110184641).
Regarding claim 15, Stahl in view of Reid and Birang fails to disclose wherein the substrate holder is configured to hold the substrate with the surface to be plated being oriented to a side in the plating tank.
In the same or similar field of electroplating, Wang discloses wherein electroplating devices may be arranged horizontally or vertically [0061], [0077]. Regardless of orientation, Wang discloses that the substrate and anode remain parallel to carry out electroplating [0080]-[0081].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to produce an apparatus comprising orienting a surface to be plated to a side because Wang teaches in a similar arrangement to Stahl, Reid and Birang, that electroplating can be successfully carried out in either a horizontal or vertical orientation to produce the same or similar predictable result.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 30 April 2026 have been fully considered. The remarks on pages 5-9 are directed towards the previous grounds of rejection which are withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment and therefore will not be specifically addressed at this time. New grounds of rejection are necessitated by amendment.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEFANIE S WITTENBERG whose telephone number is (571)270-7594. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:00 am -4:00 pm 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, Luan Van can be reached at (571) 272-8521. 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.
/Stefanie S Wittenberg/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1795
Prosecution Insights