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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/28/2025 has been entered.
Claim Status
Claims 1, 5-9, and 12-21 are pending.
Claims 1, 9, and 18 are currently amended.
Claims 18-20 are currently withdrawn.
Claim 21 is newly added.
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, 5-6, 8-9, 12-14, 16, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuppurao (US 20070042117 A1), in view of Wada (JP 2017199874 A, using attached English machine translation) and Ranish (US 20140330422 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kuppurao teaches an epitaxial reactor system for semiconductor wafer processing (Fig. 5, [0037] film formation system 400), the system comprising: a reactor comprising: a reaction chamber (Fig. 5, [0018], chamber 103) having an upper wall and a lower wall (Fig. 5, [0037], chamber 103 has upper and lower walls defined by chamber walls 102), the upper and lower walls defining an interior volume which receives a semiconductor wafer for epitaxy (Fig. 5, [0019], [0037], chamber walls 102 define chamber space 103 by top surface 105 and bottom surface 107, between which substrate 106 is contained);
an upper module positioned above the upper wall of the reaction chamber (Fig. 5, [0021], [0037], horizontal portion of conduit 120 where upper inlet port 124 is located, above top surface 105); and
a lower module positioned below the lower wall of the reaction chamber (Fig. 5, [0021], [0037], horizontal portion of conduit 120 where lower inlet port 124 is located, below bottom surface 107);
a cooling circuit (Fig. 5, [0022], [0037] blower 140 and conduit 120 with input conduits 124/126 and output conduits 128/130) comprising:
a blower to circulate fluid within the upper module and the lower module (Fig. 1, [0022], blower 140 is connected to upper surface 105 and lower surface 107);
a damper located downstream from the blower (Fig. 5, [0037]-[0038], coolant regulator 431 is located downstream of blower 120), wherein the damper separates the flow of fluid into a first portion supplied to the upper module and a second portion supplied to the lower module (Fig. 5, [0037]-[0038], coolant regulator 431 separates flow of fluid between top inlet port 124 and bottom inlet port 126), wherein the damper is selectably positioned to control an amount of fluid flow provided to each of the first portion supplied to the upper module and the second portion supplied to the lower module (Fig. 5, [0037]-[0038], coolant regulator 431 is a valve that is movable in position, where coolant regulator 431 separates flow of fluid between top inlet port 124 and bottom inlet port 126);
a controller in communication with the blower and the damper actuator (Fig. 6, [0031], [0037]-[0042], processor 510 send signals to cooling power control output 533/534 which opens or restricts the coolant regulator 431/439, where one coolant regulator may utilize control circuitry to control the speed of the blower 140), the controller including a processor and a non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions (Fig. 6, [0037]-[0042], processor 510 in communication with memory 520) that, when executed by the processor, cause the controller to:
receive epitaxial process information associated with the reactor (Fig. 6, [0037]-[0042], control logic 500 executed by processor 510 receives various process inputs such as temperatures, gas flow rates, etc);
generate a blower output (Fig. 6, [0037]-[0042], processor 510 utilizes difference between measured temperatures 521/522 and target temperatures 523/524 to adjust coolant regulators 431/439, where one coolant regulator may utilize control circuitry to control the speed of the blower 140, [0038]), each output generated based on the epitaxial process information (Fig. 6, [0037]-[0042], processor 510 utilizes difference between measured temperatures 521/522 and target temperatures 523/524 to adjust coolant regulators 431/439, where one coolant regulator may utilize control circuitry to control the speed of the blower 140, [0038]); and
transmit the blower output to the blower (Fig. 6, [0031], processor 510 sends signals to a cooling power control output 533/534 to control the coolant regulators 431/439, where one coolant regulator may utilize control circuitry to control the speed of the blower 140, [0038]).
Kuppurao fails to explicitly teach a damper actuator coupled to the damper that adjusts a position of the damper;
generate a damper position output;
transmit the damper position output to the damper actuator; and
wherein the epitaxial process information indicates a specific process step being performed in the reactor, the specific process step being a chamber cleaning step performed after a wafering process step.
However, Wada teaches teach a damper actuator coupled to the damper that adjusts a position of the damper (Wada, Fig. 3, [0061]-[0062], position of valve body 44 of damper 30 is adjusted via support shaft 43 and damper motor 45);
generate a damper position output (Wada, [0093], control unit 18 individually controls the damper motors 45 of the respective dampers 31, 32, 33 by generating a PID control loop); and
transmit the damper position output to the damper actuator (Wada, [0064], damper motor 45 position moves via control signal from control unit 18).
Wada is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are 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 damper actuator and associated control scheme into the apparatus of Kuppurao as doing so would allow for the control unit to utilize PID (Proportional Integral Differential) control instead of linear interpolation to adjust the damper in response to temperature feedback and temperature setpoint (Wada, [0093]).
Modified Kuppurao fails to teach wherein the epitaxial process information indicates a specific process step being performed in the reactor, the specific process step being a chamber cleaning step performed after a wafering process step.
However, Ranish teaches wherein the epitaxial process information indicates a specific process step being performed in the reactor, the specific process step being a chamber cleaning step performed after a wafering process step (Ranish, Fig. 2, [0061], controller 224 includes CPU 230, support circuits 228 and memory 226, where the CPU 230 may be one of any form of computer processor that can be used in an industrial setting for controlling various actions and sub-processors, such as method 400 wherein a substrate is processed in the chamber in steps 402-412, and a cleaning process is performed in the chamber after in step 414, Fig. 4, [0087]).
Ranish is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are 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 cleaning step following a substrate processing step as taught by Ranish into the apparatus of modified Kuppurao as doing so would allow for removing the deposits in the chamber, thereby correcting reduction in transmissivity of chamber components to lamp radiation and to substrate emissions, maintaining repeatability of film properties from substrate to substrate (Ranish, [0087]).
To clarify the record, the limitations “to circulate fluid within the upper module and the lower module“, “that adjusts a position of the damper”, and “wherein the damper is selectably positioned to control an amount of fluid flow provided to each of the first portion supplied to the upper module and the second portion supplied to the lower module” is merely an intended use and is given patentable weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the intended use. The blower and cooling circuit of Kuppurao are connected in a loop including the upper and lower chamber area, thereby being capable of meeting the claim limitation. The damper 431 of Kuppurao is provided downstream of the blower between the upper module and lower module within the flow path of the fluid, separating the flow path between the upper and lower module, and is movable in position, thereby being capable of meeting the claim limitation. The damper motor of Wada is connected to the valve body and is capable of moving the valve body, thereby being capable of meeting the claim limitation. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. See MPEP 2114(II).
Regarding claim 5, Kuppurao teaches a temperature sensor connected to the controller (Fig. 5, [0026], [0037]-[0042], top surface temperature measuring device 132 sends temperature inputs 531 to processor 510), wherein the temperature sensor measures a temperature of the upper wall of the reaction chamber (Fig. 5, [0026], top surface temperature measuring device 132 measures temperature of top surface 105).
To clarify the record, the limitation “measures a temperature of the upper wall of the reaction chamber” is merely an intended use and is given patentable weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the intended use. The top surface measuring device of Kuppurao measures temperature of a surface and it mounted in a position above the upper surface of the reactor, thereby being capable of meeting the claim limitation. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. See MPEP 2114(II).
Regarding claim 6, Kuppurao teaches wherein the epitaxial process information includes information associated with a target temperature of the upper wall ([0037]-[0042], target temperature 523 is provided to processor 510), and wherein the non-transitory computer-readable media of the controller stores instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the controller (Fig. 6, [0037]-[0042], control logic 500 of processor 510) to: receive a measured temperature of the upper wall from the temperature sensor ([0037]-[0042], top surface temperature measuring device 132 sends temperature inputs 531 to processor 510); and generate, by comparing the measured temperature and the target temperature of the upper wall, an updated blower output (Fig. 6, [0037]-[0042], processor 510 utilizes difference between measured temperatures 521/522 and target temperatures 523/524 to adjust coolant regulators 431/439, where one coolant regulator may utilize control circuitry to control the speed of the blower 140, [0038]).
Regarding claim 8, Kuppurao fails to teach wherein the damper position output causes the actuator to position the damper to a pre-determined position associated with the epitaxial process information.
However, Wada teaches wherein the damper position output causes the actuator to position the damper to a pre-determined position associated with the epitaxial process information (Wada, [0064], damper motor 45 position moves via control signal from control unit 18 based on temperature information provided by sensors 51 to 53).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the damper actuator and associated control scheme into the apparatus of Kuppurao as doing so would allow for the control unit to utilize PID (Proportional Integral Differential) control instead of linear interpolation to adjust the damper in response to temperature feedback and temperature setpoint (Wada, [0093]).
Regarding claim 9, Kuppurao teaches a cooling system (Fig. 5, [0037]-[0042], blower 140 and conduit 120) for a semiconductor wafer reactor, the reactor having a reaction chamber (Fig. 5, [0037]-[0042], chamber 103), an upper module (Fig. 5, [0021], [0037]-[0042], horizontal portion of conduit 120 where upper inlet port 124 is located, above top surface 105), and a lower module (Fig. 5, [0021], [0037]-[0042], horizontal portion of conduit 120 where lower inlet port 124 is located, below bottom surface 107), the cooling system comprising:
a cooling circuit (Fig. 5, [0022], [0037] blower 140 and conduit 120 with input conduits 124/126 and output conduits 128/130) comprising:
a blower to circulate a cooling fluid within the upper module and the lower module (Fig. 1, [0022], blower 140 is connected to upper surface 105 and lower surface 107);
a damper located downstream from the blower (Fig. 5, [0037]-[0038], coolant regulator 431 is located downstream of blower 120), wherein the damper separates the flow of fluid into a first portion supplied to the upper module and a second portion supplied to the lower module (Fig. 5, [0037]-[0038], coolant regulator 431 separates flow of fluid between top inlet port 124 and bottom inlet port 126), wherein the damper is selectably positioned to control an amount of fluid flow provided to each of the first portion supplied to the upper module and the second portion supplied to the lower module (Fig. 5, [0037]-[0038], coolant regulator 431 is a valve that is movable in position, where coolant regulator 431 separates flow of fluid between top inlet port 124 and bottom inlet port 126); and
a controller in communication with the blower and the damper actuator (Fig. 6, [0031], [0037]-[0042], processor 510 send signals to cooling power control output 533/534 which opens or restricts the coolant regulator 431/439, where one coolant regulator may utilize control circuitry to control the speed of the blower 140), the controller including a processor and a non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions (Fig. 6, [0037]-[0042], processor 510 in communication with memory 520) that, when executed by the processor, cause the controller to:
receive epitaxial process information associated with the reactor (Fig. 6, [0037]-[0042], control logic 500 executed by processor 510 receives various process inputs such as temperatures, gas flow rates, etc);
generate a blower output (Fig. 6, [0037]-[0042], processor 510 utilizes difference between measured temperatures 521/522 and target temperatures 523/524 to adjust coolant regulators 431/439, where one coolant regulator may utilize control circuitry to control the speed of the blower 140, [0038]), each output generated based on the epitaxial process information (Fig. 6, [0037]-[0042], processor 510 utilizes difference between measured temperatures 521/522 and target temperatures 523/524 to adjust coolant regulators 431/439, where one coolant regulator may utilize control circuitry to control the speed of the blower 140, [0038]); and
transmit the blower output to the blower (Fig. 6, [0031], processor 510 sends signals to a cooling power control output 533/534 to control the coolant regulators 431/439, where one coolant regulator may utilize control circuitry to control the speed of the blower 140, [0038]).
Kuppurao fails to explicitly teach a damper actuator coupled to the damper that adjusts a position of the damper;
generate a damper position output;
transmit the damper position output to the damper; and
wherein the specific process step being a chamber cleaning step performed after a processed wafer is removed from the reaction chamber.
However, Wada teaches a damper actuator coupled to the damper that adjusts a position of the damper (Wada, Fig. 3, [0061]-[0062], position of valve body 44 of damper 30 is adjusted via support shaft 43 and damper motor 45);
generate a damper position output (Wada, [0093], control unit 18 individually controls the damper motors 45 of the respective dampers 31, 32, 33 by PID control); and
transmit the damper position output to the damper actuator (Wada, [0064], damper motor 45 position moves via control signal from control unit 18).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the damper actuator and associated control scheme into the apparatus of Kuppurao as doing so would allow for the control unit to utilize PID (Proportional Integral Differential) control instead of linear interpolation to adjust the damper in response to temperature feedback and temperature setpoint (Wada, [0093]).
Modified Kuppurao fails to teach wherein the specific process step being a chamber cleaning step performed after a processed wafer is removed from the reaction chamber.
However, Ranish teaches wherein the specific process step being a chamber cleaning step performed after a processed wafer is removed from the reaction chamber (Ranish, Fig. 2, [0061], controller 224 includes CPU 230, support circuits 228 and memory 226, where the CPU 230 may be one of any form of computer processor that can be used in an industrial setting for controlling various actions and sub-processors, such as method 400 wherein a substrate is processed in the chamber in steps 402-412, and a cleaning process is performed in the chamber after in step 414, Fig. 4, [0087]).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the cleaning step following a substrate processing step as taught by Ranish into the apparatus of modified Kuppurao as doing so would allow for removing the deposits in the chamber, thereby correcting reduction in transmissivity of chamber components to lamp radiation and to substrate emissions, maintaining repeatability of film properties from substrate to substrate (Ranish, [0087]).
To clarify the record, the limitations “to circulate fluid within the upper module and the lower module“, “that adjusts a position of the damper”, and “wherein the damper is selectably positioned to control an amount of fluid flow provided to each of the first portion supplied to the upper module and the second portion supplied to the lower module” is merely an intended use and is given patentable weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the intended use. The blower and cooling circuit of Kuppurao are connected in a loop including the upper and lower chamber area, thereby being capable of meeting the claim limitation. The damper 431 of Kuppurao is provided downstream of the blower between the upper module and lower module within the flow path of the fluid, separating the flow path between the upper and lower module, and is movable in position, thereby being capable of meeting the claim limitation. The damper motor of Wada is connected to the valve body and is capable of moving the valve body, thereby being capable of meeting the claim limitation. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. See MPEP 2114(II).
Regarding claim 12, Kuppurao fails to teach wherein the damper position output causes the actuator to position the damper to a pre-determined position associated with the epitaxial process information.
However, Wada teaches wherein the damper position output causes the actuator to position the damper to a pre-determined position associated with the epitaxial process information (Wada, [0064], damper motor 45 position moves via control signal from control unit 18 based on temperature information provided by sensors 51 to 53).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the damper actuator and associated control scheme into the apparatus of Kuppurao as doing so would allow for the control unit to utilize PID (Proportional Integral Differential) control instead of linear interpolation to adjust the damper in response to temperature feedback and temperature setpoint (Wada, [0093]).
Regarding claim 13, Kuppurao teaches further comprising a temperature sensor connected to the controller (Fig. 5, [0026], [0037]-[0042], top surface temperature measuring device 132 sends temperature inputs 531 to processor 510), wherein the temperature sensor measures a temperature of the upper wall of the reaction chamber (Fig. 5, [0026], top surface temperature measuring device 132 measures temperature of top surface 105).
To clarify the record, the limitation “measures a temperature of the upper wall of the reaction chamber” is merely an intended use and is given patentable weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the intended use. The top surface measuring device of Kuppurao measures temperature of a surface and it mounted in a position above the upper surface of the reactor, thereby being capable of meeting the claim limitation. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. See MPEP 2114(II).
Regarding claim 14, Kuppurao teaches wherein the non- transitory computer-readable media of the controller stores instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the controller (Fig. 6, [0037]-[0042], control logic 500 of processor 510) to: determine, based on the epitaxial process information, a target temperature of the upper wall of the reaction chamber ([0037]-[0042], target temperature 523 is provided to processor 510); receive a measured temperature of the upper wall from the temperature sensor ([0037]-[0042], top surface temperature measuring device 132 sends temperature inputs 531 to processor 510); and generate, by comparing the measured temperature and the target temperature of the upper wall, an updated blower output (Fig. 6, [0037]-[0042], processor 510 utilizes difference between measured temperatures 521/522 and target temperatures 523/524 to adjust coolant regulators 431/439, where one coolant regulator may utilize control circuitry to control the speed of the blower 140, [0038]).
Regarding claim 16, Kuppurao teaches wherein the non- transitory computer-readable media of the controller stores instructions that, when executed by the processor (Fig. 6, [0037]-[0042], control logic 500 of processor 510), cause the controller to: receive a blower output feedback signal from the blower; and generate the updated blower output (Fig. 5, [0034]-[0042], blower speed control circuitry is used in conjunction with processor 510 to change the speed of the blower 140, [0038], [0043]) using feedback control based on each of: a difference between the measured temperature and the target temperature of the upper wall, and the blower output feedback signal (Fig. 6, [0037]-[0042], processor 510 utilizes difference between measured temperatures 521/522 and target temperatures 523/524 to adjust coolant regulators 431/439, where one coolant regulator may utilize control circuitry to control the speed of the blower 140, [0038], [0043]).
Kuppurao fails to explicitly teach wherein the controller is caused to receive a damper position feedback signal from the damper actuator; and use feedback control based on the damper position feedback signal.
However, Wada teaches wherein the controller is caused to receive a damper position feedback signal from the damper actuator and using feedback control based on the damper position feedback signal (Wada, [0106], position of damper 31/33 is adjusted by control unit 18 to a new target position relative to an initial position, calculated during PID control cycle looping, [0094]-[0100], where the relationship between the rotational position of the valve body 44 and the opening degree of the damper 31/33 is stored in the control unit 18 in advance, [0068]).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the damper actuator and associated control scheme into the apparatus of Kuppurao as doing so would allow for the control unit to utilize PID (Proportional Integral Differential) control instead of linear interpolation to adjust the damper in response to temperature feedback and temperature setpoint (Wada, [0093]).
Regarding claim 21, Kuppurao teaches wherein increasing the amount of fluid flow to the first portion supplied to the upper module decreases the amount of fluid flow to the second portion supplied to the lower module (Fig. 5, [0037]-[0042], coolant regulator 431 may be an air vane, adjustable iris, or valve).
To clarify the record, the limitation “wherein increasing the amount of fluid flow to the first portion supplied to the upper module decreases the amount of fluid flow to the second portion supplied to the lower module” is merely an intended use and is given patentable weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the intended use. The damper 431 of Kuppurao is provided downstream of the blower between the upper module and lower module within the flow path of the fluid, separating the flow path between the upper and lower module, and is movable in position, thereby being capable of meeting the claim limitation. Per the embodiment taught in Fig. 5, the coolant regulator 431 is represented as a butterfly valve located at the junction where the inlet conduit 120 splits between upper inlet port 124 and the inlet conduit 120 leading to lower inlet port 126 (Fig. 5, [0037]-[0042]). As the valve 431 is moved towards a more horizontal position from a vertical position, the amount of air flow from blower 140 towards upper inlet 124 would increase while the amount of air flow from blower 140 towards lower inlet 126 would decrease. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. See MPEP 2114(II).
Claims 7, 15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuppurao (US 20070042117 A1), in view of Wada (JP 2017199874 A) ) and Ranish (US 20140330422 A1), as applied in claims 1, 5-6, 8-9, 12-14, 16, and 21, and further in view of Kim (US 20180195174 A1).
The limitations of claims 1, 5-6, 8-9, 12-14, 16, and 21 are set forth above.
Regarding claim 7, modified Kuppurao fails to teach wherein the updated blower output is generated using proportional-integral- derivative (PID) control.
However, Kim teaches wherein the updated blower output is generated using proportional-integral- derivative (PID) control (Kim, Fig. 2, [0044], controller 124 adjusts the speed of blower 120 via PID control).
Kim is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are 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 PID control method of Kim into the apparatus of Kuppurao as doing so would provide flexibility to alter the timing frequency of device speed adjustments as necessitated by the process (Kim, [0044]).
Regarding claim 15, modified Kuppurao fails to teach wherein the updated blower output is generated using proportional-integral- derivative (PID) control.
However, Kim teaches wherein the updated blower output is generated using proportional-integral- derivative (PID) control (Kim, Fig. 2, [0044], controller 124 adjusts the speed of blower 120 via PID control).
Kim is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are 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 PID control method of Kim into the apparatus of Kuppurao as doing so would provide flexibility to alter the timing frequency of device speed adjustments as necessitated by the process (Kim, [0044]).
Regarding claim 17, modified Kuppurao fails to teach wherein the updated blower output is generated using proportional-integral- derivative (PID) control.
However, Kim teaches wherein the updated blower output is generated using proportional-integral- derivative (PID) control (Kim, Fig. 2, [0044], controller 124 adjusts the speed of blower 120 via PID control).
Kim is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are 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 PID control method of Kim into the apparatus of Kuppurao as doing so would provide flexibility to alter the timing frequency of device speed adjustments as necessitated by the process (Kim, [0044]).
Response to Arguments
In the Applicant’s response filed 10/28/2025, the Applicant asserts that none of the cited prior art, particularly Kuppurao, teach the claim limitations “wherein the damper separates the flow of fluid into a first portion supplied to the upper module and a second portion supplied to the lower module, wherein the damper is selectably positioned to control an amount of fluid flow provided to each of the first portion supplied to the upper module and the second portion supplied to the lower module” of independent claim 1 as newly amended. Specifically, the Applicant asserts that Kuppurao teaches a singular, unseparated coolant flow supplied to both the upper surface and lower surface that is controlled by separate dampers at the inlets of each respective inlet port. The Examiner has carefully considered the arguments but does not find them to be persuasive.
To clarify the record, the limitation “wherein the damper is selectably positioned to control an amount of fluid flow provided to each of the first portion supplied to the upper module and the second portion supplied to the lower module” of claims 1 and 9, and “wherein increasing the amount of fluid flow to the first portion supplied to the upper module decreases the amount of fluid flow to the second portion supplied to the lower module” of claim 21 is merely an intended use and is given patentable weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the intended use. The damper 431 of Kuppurao is provided downstream of the blower between the upper module and lower module within the flow path of the fluid, separating the flow path between the upper and lower module, and is movable in position, thereby being capable of meeting the claim limitation. Per the embodiment taught in Fig. 5, the coolant regulator 431 is represented as a butterfly valve located at the junction where the inlet conduit 120 splits between upper inlet port 124 and the inlet conduit 120 leading to lower inlet port 126 (Fig. 5, [0037]-[0042]). As the valve 431 is moved towards a more horizontal position from a vertical position, the amount of air flow (first portion) from blower 140 towards upper inlet 124 would increase while the amount of air flow (second portion) from blower 140 towards lower inlet 126 would decrease. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. See MPEP 2114(II).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Hohenwarter (US 20140053982 A1) teaches a valve mounted to the wall of an air flow path, movable, and separating the air flow between an upper and lower part of the chamber
Hoffman (US 20050167051 A1) teaches a branching gas flow path where control of gas flow by a valve on each branching path and control of gas by an articulating vane are taught as analogous embodiments.
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