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.
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, 4-7, 9-10 and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fink et al., US 2003/0087488 in view of Mahoney, US 5,521,351.
With respect to independent claim 1, Fink et al. shows the invention substantially as claimed an antenna assembly, comprising an antenna 90; and a dielectric enclosure 96, surrounding the antenna; and a Faraday shield 92, disposed around the antenna, and arranged between the antenna and the dielectric enclosure, wherein the Faraday shield comprises a non-uniform opacity along an antenna axis of the antenna, wherein a first opacity of the Faraday shield at a first position (a position in the Faraday shield where there is no opening 98, shown in the modified Figs. 5A-5C below by the area not encircled by the rectangles) along the antenna axis is greater than a second opacity of the Faraday shield at a second position (a position in the Faraday shield where there is an opening 98, shown in the modified Figs. 5A-5C below by the area encircled by the rectangles and pointed by the arrows) along the antenna axis of the antenna; (see, for example, Figs. 4A-4B and 5A-5C, and their descriptions, Figs. 4A and Figs. 5A-5C are shown below).
PNG
media_image1.png
171
341
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
388
336
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fink et al. does not expressly disclose the claimed Faraday shield configuration. Mahoney discloses the use of different Faraday shield configurations including a configuration in which the Faraday shield comprises a plurality of ribs 101, wherein the at least one rib comprises a first rib end and a second rib end facing one another along the circumferential path, wherein the first rib end and the second rib end are separated by a gap such that the at least one rib does not form a continuous ring (see, for example, Figs. 10-11, and their descriptions, Figs. 10-11 are shown below).
PNG
media_image3.png
441
352
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the Faraday shield of the apparatus of Fink et al. as to comprise the claimed Faraday shield configuration because such configuration is known and used it the art as a suitable configuration for effectively and efficiently control the capacitive coupling allowed through the shield. It should be further notice that in the apparatus of Fink et al. modified by Mahoney at least one rib of the plurality of ribs would extend along a circumferential path of the antenna.
With respect to claims 2 and 10, it should be noted that the Faraday shield of the antenna assembly of the apparatus of Fink et al. would be affixed to an inner wall of the dielectric enclosure.
Regarding claim 4, it should be noted that Fink et al. further discloses an embodiment wherein the antenna assembly of the apparatus comprises a linear antenna 242, having a grounded end and a powered end, the linear antenna extending along an antenna axis; wherein the dielectric enclosure is elongated along the antenna axis (see, for example, Fig. 7A and its description, Fig. 7A is shown below).
PNG
media_image4.png
278
441
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 5 and 12, it should be noted that Mahoney clearly discloses that the Faraday shield further comprises a spine 102 (see, for example, Fig. 11 of Mahoney above). It should be noted that in the apparatus of Fink et al. modified by Mahoney, the spine would extend parallel to the antenna axis and is arranged to connect the plurality of ribs to one another.
Concerning claims 6 and 13, Fink et al. further discloses an embodiment wherein plurality of linear antennas are connected to each other with electrical elements 291 (see, for example, Fig. 7B and its description, Fig. 7B is shown below).
PNG
media_image5.png
287
437
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fink et al. does not expressly disclose that the linear antenna has the claimed hairpin structure, however, the configuration of the claimed antenna is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the antenna is significant. This notwithstanding, Mahoney discloses that the antenna 70 is a linear antenna comprising a hairpin structure, the hairpin structure comprising a first linear portion (the linear portion with the arrow pointing downward) that extends from a powered end, a second linear portion (the linear portion with the arrow pointing upward) that extends from the grounded end, and a connecting portion connecting the first linear portion to the second linear portion (the portion at the middle of the antenna linking both linear portions), wherein the grounded end is disposed next to the powered end; (see, for example, Figs. 10 and 11, and their descriptions, Figs. 10-11 of Mahoney are shown above). Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the antenna assembly of the apparatus of Fink et al. as to comprise a hairpin structure because such configuration is known and used in the art as a suitable configuration for effectively and efficiently generating inductive coupling plasma by electrically connecting adjacent antenna portions so that high frequency currents in opposite directions flow through the first antenna portion and the second antenna portion. It should also be noted that the side of the linear antenna where the grounded end and powered end are disposed comprises a higher voltage side of the linear antenna, and the side of the linear antenna where the connecting portion is located comprises a lower voltage region of the linear antenna, since the voltage would be higher at the powered end.
With respect to claims 7 and 14, it should be noted that in the apparatus of Fink et al. a first end surrounds the powered end of the linear antenna, and a second end surrounds the connecting portion of the linear antenna. As broadly claimed, the Faraday shield of the apparatus of Fink et al. modified by Mahoney would exhibit a first opacity at the first end due to the presence of the first/top faraday shield rib and exhibits a second opacity at a second end where there is no faraday shield rib.
With respect to claims 9-10, it should be noted that Fink et al. further discloses a processing system 200 comprising a plasma chamber 210, wherein the antenna assembly is disposed within the plasma chamber, wherein the dielectric enclosure is elongated along the antenna axis, and wherein the antenna 242 is a linear antenna having a grounded end and a powered end, the linear antenna extending along an antenna axis, (see, for example, Fig. 7A above); and the Faraday shield is positioned on an inner wall of the dielectric enclosure.
Claim(s) 8 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fink et al., US 2003/0087488 in view of Mahoney, US 5,521,351, as applied to claims 1-2, 4-7, 9-10 and 12-14 above, and further in view of George et al., US 2004/0244691 or Khater et al., US 6,459,066 or Young et al., US 5,903,106.
Concerning claims 8 and 15, Fink et al. and Mahoney are applied as above but do not expressly disclose that the non-uniform opacity varies along the antenna axis as claimed. George et al. discloses a Faraday shield 470 having a non-uniform opacity that would vary along an antenna axis as claimed by the use of slots having a variation in their opening; (see, for example, Figs. 8a-8b, and their descriptions, modified Figs. 8a and 8b are shown below showing the slots having the opening variation within a rectangle).
PNG
media_image6.png
262
350
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
262
275
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Also, Khater et al. discloses a Faraday shield 1500 having a non-uniform opacity that would vary along an antenna axis as claimed by the use of reduction slots 610 spaced apart by a desired spacing; (see, for example, Figs. 6c, and its description, Fig. 6c is shown below).
PNG
media_image8.png
193
230
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Additionally, Young et al. discloses a Faraday shield 19 having a non-uniform opacity that would vary along an antenna axis as claimed by the use of reduction slots 33 having a variation in their openings and/or spaced apart by a desired spacing; (see, for example, Fig. 6, and its description, Fig. 6 is shown below).
PNG
media_image9.png
286
422
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of these disclosures, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the Faraday shield of the apparatus of Fink et al. modified by Mahoney, as to have a non-uniform opacity that varies as claimed because such configuration is known and used in the art as a suitable configuration for effectively and efficiently affect the plasma density and radial uniformity over a range of plasma process parameters by moderating the RF penetration/transmission into the plasma chamber, and thereby optimize the apparatus and the method performed within the apparatus.
Claim(s) 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fink et al., US 2003/0087488 in view of Mahoney, US 5,521,351 and George et al., US 2004/0244691 or Khater et al., US 6,459,066 or Young et al., US 5,903,106, as applied to claims 8 and 15, and further in view of Godet et al., US 2015/0325410.
Regarding claim 16, Fink et al., Mahoney, George et al., Khater et al., and Young et al. are applied as above, and Fink et al. further discloses a processing system 200 comprising a plasma chamber 210; wherein the antenna assembly is disposed within the plasma chamber, wherein the dielectric enclosure is elongated along the antenna axis, wherein the antenna 242 is a linear antenna having a grounded end and a powered end, the linear antenna extending along an antenna axis; and a substrate holder 20; (see, for example, Fig. 7A below).
PNG
media_image4.png
278
441
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Furthermore, and also with respect to claim 20, it should further be noted that an opacity of the Faraday shield of the apparatus of Fink et al. modified by Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al. changes along the antenna axis. However, Fink et al. and Mahoney do not expressly disclose the claimed extraction plate. Godet et al. discloses a plasma processing apparatus comprising an extraction plate 114, disposed on a side of a plasma chamber (see, for example, Fig. 1A and its description, Fig. 1A is shown below).
PNG
media_image10.png
390
373
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the apparatus of Fink et al. modified by Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al., as to further comprise an extraction plate because such means is known and used in the art as a suitable means for effectively and efficiently extracting ions as an ion beam and direct the ion beam toward the substrate holder. It should be noted that the incorporation of the extraction plate of Godet et al. into the apparatus of Fink et al. modified by Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al., would create a plasma chamber above the extraction plate, and a processing chamber below the extraction plate, wherein the processing chamber has a substrate holder.
Regarding claim 17, it should be noted that Mahoney clearly discloses that the Faraday shield further comprises a spine 102 (see, for example, Fig. 11 of Mahoney above). It should be noted that in the apparatus of Fink et al. modified by Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al. and Godet et al., the spine would extend parallel to the antenna axis and is arranged to connect the plurality of ribs to one another.
Concerning claim 18, Fink et al. further discloses an embodiment wherein plurality of linear antennas are connected to each other with electrical elements 291 (see, for example, Fig. 7B and its description, Fig. 7B is shown below).
PNG
media_image5.png
287
437
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fink et al. does not expressly disclose that the linear antenna has the claimed hairpin structure, however, the configuration of the claimed antenna is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the antenna is significant. This notwithstanding, Mahoney discloses that the antenna 70 is a linear antenna comprising a hairpin structure, the hairpin structure comprising a first linear portion (the linear portion with the arrow pointing downward) that extends from a powered end, a second linear portion (the linear portion with the arrow pointing upward) that extends from the grounded end, and a connecting portion connecting the first linear portion to the second linear portion (the portion at the middle of the antenna linking both linear portions), wherein the grounded end is disposed next to the powered end; (see, for example, Figs. 10 and 11, and their descriptions, Figs. 10-11 of Mahoney are shown above). Therefore, in view of these disclosures, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the antenna assembly of the apparatus of Fink et al. modified by Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al. and Godet et al., as to comprise a hairpin structure because such configuration is known and used in the art as a suitable configuration for effectively and efficiently generating inductive coupling plasma by electrically connecting adjacent antenna portions so that high frequency currents in opposite directions flow through the first antenna portion and the second antenna portion. It should also be noted that the side of the linear antenna where the grounded end and powered end are disposed comprises a higher voltage side of the linear antenna, and the side of the linear antenna where the connecting portion is located comprises a lower voltage region of the linear antenna, since the voltage would be higher at the powered end.
With respect to claim 19, it should be noted that in the apparatus of Fink et al. a first end surrounds the powered end of the linear antenna, and a second end surrounds the connecting portion of the linear antenna. As broadly claimed, the Faraday shield of the apparatus of Fink et al. modified by Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al. and Godet et al. would exhibit a first opacity at the first end due to the presence of the first/top faraday shield rib and exhibits a second opacity at a second end where there is no faraday shield rib.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-7, 9-10, and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakai et al., WO 2018/173892 in view of Fink et al., US 2003/0087488 and Mahoney, US 5,521,351.
With respect to independent claim 1, Sakai et al. shows the invention substantially as claimed an antenna assembly, comprising an antenna 3; and a dielectric enclosure 10, surrounding the antenna; (see, for example, Fig. 1 and its disclosure, Fig. 1 shown below).
PNG
media_image11.png
311
507
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Sakai et al. does not expressly disclose the claimed Faraday shield. Fink et al. discloses an antenna assembly comprising an antenna 90; a dielectric enclosure 96 surrounding the antenna; and a Faraday shield 92, disposed around the antenna, and arranged between the antenna and the dielectric enclosure, wherein the Faraday shield comprises a non-uniform opacity along an antenna axis of the antenna, wherein a first opacity of the Faraday shield at a first position (a position in the Faraday shield where there is no opening 98, shown in the modified Figs. 5A-5C below by the area not encircled by the rectangles) along the antenna axis is greater than a second opacity of the Faraday shield at a second position (a position in the Faraday shield where there is an opening 98, shown in the modified Figs. 5A-5C below by the area encircled by the rectangles and pointed by the arrows) along the antenna axis of the antenna; (see, for example, Figs. 4A-4B and 5A-5C, and their descriptions, Figs. 4A and Figs. 5A-5C are shown below).
PNG
media_image1.png
171
341
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
388
336
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the antenna assembly of the apparatus of Sakai et al. as to further comprise a Faraday shield because such means is known and used in the art as a suitable means for effectively and efficiently transmit inductive coupling power from the antenna to the plasma region while minimizing capacitive coupling between the antenna and the plasma region.
Sakai et al. and Fink et al. do not expressly disclose the claimed Faraday shield configuration. Mahoney discloses the use of different Faraday shield configurations including a configuration in which the Faraday shield comprises a plurality of ribs 101, wherein the at least one rib comprises a first rib end and a second rib end facing one another along the circumferential path, wherein the first rib end and the second rib end are separated by a gap such that the at least one rib does not form a continuous ring (see, for example, Figs. 10-11, and their descriptions, Figs. 10-11 are shown below).
PNG
media_image3.png
441
352
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the Faraday shield of the apparatus of Sakai et al. modified by Fink et al. as to comprise the claimed Faraday shield configuration because such configuration is known and used it the art as a suitable configuration for effectively and efficiently control the capacitive coupling allowed through the shield. It should be further notice that in the apparatus of Sakai et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney at least one rib of the plurality of ribs would extend along a circumferential path of the antenna.
With respect to claims 2 and 10, it should be noted that the Faraday shield of the antenna assembly of the apparatus of Sakai et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney would be affixed to an inner wall of the dielectric enclosure.
Regarding claim 4, it should be noted that the antenna assembly of the apparatus of Sakai et al. comprises a linear antenna, having a grounded end 3b, and a
powered end 3a, the linear antenna extending along the antenna axis; wherein the dielectric enclosure is elongated along the antenna axis (see, for example, Fig. 1 and its description, Fig. 1 shown above).
Regarding claims 5 and 12, it should be noted that Mahoney clearly discloses that the Faraday shield further comprises a spine 102 (see, for example, Fig. 11 of Mahoney above). It should be noted that in the apparatus of Sakai et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney, the spine would extend parallel to the antenna axis and is arranged to connect the plurality of ribs to one another.
Concerning claims 6 and 13, Fink et al. further discloses an embodiment wherein plurality of linear antennas are connected to each other with electrical elements 291 (see, for example, Fig. 7B and its description, Fig. 7B is shown below).
PNG
media_image5.png
287
437
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Sakai et al. and Fink et al. do not expressly disclose that the linear antenna has the claimed hairpin structure, however, the configuration of the claimed antenna is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the antenna is significant. This notwithstanding, Mahoney discloses that the antenna 70 is a linear antenna comprising a hairpin structure, the hairpin structure comprising a first linear portion (the linear portion with the arrow pointing downward) that extends from a powered end, a second linear portion (the linear portion with the arrow pointing upward) that extends from the grounded end, and a connecting portion connecting the first linear portion to the second linear portion (the portion at the middle of the antenna linking both linear portions), wherein the grounded end is disposed next to the powered end; (see, for example, Figs. 10 and 11, and their descriptions, Figs. 10-11 of Mahoney are shown above). Therefore, in view of these disclosures, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the antenna assembly of the apparatus of Sakai et al. modified by Fink et al. as to comprise a hairpin structure because such configuration is known and used in the art as a suitable configuration for effectively and efficiently generating inductive coupling plasma by electrically connecting adjacent antenna portions so that high frequency currents in opposite directions flow through the first antenna portion and the second antenna portion. It should also be noted that the side of the linear antenna where the grounded end and powered end are disposed comprises a higher voltage side of the linear antenna, and the side of the linear antenna where the connecting portion is located comprises a lower voltage region of the linear antenna, since the voltage would be higher at the powered end.
With respect to claims 7 and 14, it should be noted that in the apparatus of Sakai et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney, a first end surrounds the powered end of the linear antenna, and a second end surrounds the connecting portion of the linear antenna. As broadly claimed, the Faraday shield of the apparatus of Sakai et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney would exhibit a first opacity at the first end due to the presence of the first/top faraday shield rib and exhibits a second opacity at a second end where there is no faraday shield rib.
With respect to claim 9, it should be noted that Sakai et al. further discloses a processing system comprising a plasma chamber 2, wherein the antenna assembly is disposed within the plasma chamber, wherein the dielectric enclosure is elongated along the antenna axis, and wherein the antenna 3 is a linear antenna having a grounded end 3a and a powered end 3b, the linear antenna extending along an antenna axis; (see, for example, Fig. 1 above).
Regarding claim 10, it should be noted that in the apparatus of Sakai et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney, the Faraday shield is positioned on an inner wall of the dielectric enclosure.
Claim(s) 8 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakai et al., WO 2018/173892 in view of Fink et al., US 2003/0087488 and Mahoney, US 5,521,351, as applied to claims 1-2, 4-7, 9-10 and 12-14 above, and further in view of George et al., US 2004/0244691 or Khater et al., US 6,459,066 or Young et al., US 5,903,106.
Concerning claims 8 and 15, Sakai et al., Fink et al., and Mahoney are applied as above but do not expressly disclose that the non-uniform opacity varies along the antenna axis as claimed. George et al. discloses a Faraday shield 470 having a non-uniform opacity that would vary along an antenna axis as claimed by the use of slots having a variation in their opening; (see, for example, Figs. 8a-8b, and their descriptions, modified Figs. 8a and 8b are shown below showing the slots having the opening variation within a rectangle).
PNG
media_image6.png
262
350
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
262
275
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Also, Khater et al. discloses a Faraday shield 1500 having a non-uniform opacity that would vary along an antenna axis as claimed by the use of reduction slots 610 spaced apart by a desired spacing; (see, for example, Figs. 6c, and its description, Fig. 6c is shown below).
PNG
media_image8.png
193
230
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Additionally, Young et al. discloses a Faraday shield 19 having a non-uniform opacity that would vary along an antenna axis as claimed by the use of reduction slots 33 having a variation in their openings and/or spaced apart by a desired spacing; (see, for example, Fig. 6, and its description, Fig. 6 is shown below).
PNG
media_image9.png
286
422
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of these disclosures, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the Faraday shield of the apparatus of Sakai et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney, as to have a non-uniform opacity that varies as claimed because such configuration is known and used in the art as a suitable configuration for effectively and efficiently affect the plasma density and radial uniformity over a range of plasma process parameters by moderating the RF penetration/transmission into the plasma chamber, and thereby optimize the apparatus and the method performed within the apparatus.
Claim(s) 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakai et al., WO 2018/173892 in view of Fink et al., US 2003/0087488 and Mahoney, US 5,521,351 and George et al., US 2004/0244691 or Khater et al., US 6,459,066 or Young et al., US 5,903,106, as applied to claims 8 and 15, and further in view of Godet et al., US 2015/0325410.
Regarding claim 16, Sakai et al., Fink et al., Mahoney, George et al., Khater et al., and Young et al. are applied as above, and Sakai et al. further discloses a processing system comprising a plasma chamber 2; wherein the antenna assembly is disposed within the plasma chamber, wherein the dielectric enclosure is elongated along the antenna axis, wherein the antenna 3 is a linear antenna having a grounded end 3a and a powered end 3b, the linear antenna extending along an antenna axis; and a substrate holder 8 (see, for example, Fig. 1 below).
PNG
media_image11.png
311
507
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Furthermore, and also with respect to claim 20, it should further be noted that an opacity of the Faraday shield of the apparatus of Sakai et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al. changes along the antenna axis. However, Sakai et al., Fink et al. and Mahoney do not expressly disclose the claimed extraction plate. Godet et al. discloses a plasma processing apparatus comprising an extraction plate 114, disposed on a side of a plasma chamber (see, for example, Fig. 1A and its description, Fig. 1A is shown below).
PNG
media_image10.png
390
373
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the apparatus of Sakai et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al., as to further comprise an extraction plate because such means is known and used in the art as a suitable means for effectively and efficiently extracting ions as an ion beam and direct the ion beam toward the substrate holder. It should be noted that the incorporation of the extraction plate of Godet et al. into the apparatus of Sakai et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al., would create a plasma chamber above the extraction plate, and a processing chamber below the extraction plate, wherein the processing chamber has a substrate holder.
Regarding claim 17, it should be noted that Mahoney clearly discloses that the Faraday shield further comprises a spine 102 (see, for example, Fig. 11 of Mahoney above). It should be noted that in the apparatus of Sakai et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al. and Godet et al., the spine would extend parallel to the antenna axis and is arranged to connect the plurality of ribs to one another.
Concerning claim 18, Fink et al. further discloses an embodiment wherein plurality of linear antennas are connected to each other with electrical elements 291 (see, for example, Fig. 7B and its description, Fig. 7B is shown below).
PNG
media_image5.png
287
437
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Sakai et al. and Fink et al. do not expressly disclose that the linear antenna has the claimed hairpin structure, however, the configuration of the claimed antenna is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the antenna is significant. This notwithstanding, Mahoney discloses that the antenna 70 is a linear antenna comprising a hairpin structure, the hairpin structure comprising a first linear portion (the linear portion with the arrow pointing downward) that extends from a powered end, a second linear portion (the linear portion with the arrow pointing upward) that extends from the grounded end, and a connecting portion connecting the first linear portion to the second linear portion (the portion at the middle of the antenna linking both linear portions), wherein the grounded end is disposed next to the powered end; (see, for example, Figs. 10 and 11, and their descriptions, Figs. 10-11 of Mahoney are shown above). Therefore, in view of these disclosures, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the antenna assembly of the apparatus of Sakai et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al. and Godet et al., as to comprise a hairpin structure because such configuration is known and used in the art as a suitable configuration for effectively and efficiently generating inductive coupling plasma by electrically connecting adjacent antenna portions so that high frequency currents in opposite directions flow through the first antenna portion and the second antenna portion. It should also be noted that the side of the linear antenna where the grounded end and powered end are disposed comprises a higher voltage side of the linear antenna, and the side of the linear antenna where the connecting portion is located comprises a lower voltage region of the linear antenna, since the voltage would be higher at the powered end.
With respect to claim 19, it should be noted that in the apparatus of Sakai et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al. and Godet et al., a first end surrounds the powered end of the linear antenna, and a second end surrounds the connecting portion of the linear antenna. Also as broadly claimed, the Faraday shield of the apparatus of Sakai et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al. and Godet et al. would exhibit a first opacity at the first end due to the presence of the first/top faraday shield rib and exhibits a second opacity at a second end where there is no faraday shield rib.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-7, 9-10, 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeom et al., US 2004/0221814 in view of Fink et al., US 2003/0087488 and Mahoney US 5,521,351.
With respect to independent claim 1, Yeom et al. shows the invention substantially as claimed an antenna assembly, comprising an antenna 32; and a dielectric enclosure 30, surrounding the antenna; (see, for example, Fig. 2 and its disclosure, Fig. 2 shown below).
PNG
media_image12.png
326
423
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Yeom et al. does not expressly disclose the claimed Faraday shield. Fink et al. discloses an antenna assembly comprising an antenna 90; a dielectric enclosure 96 surrounding the antenna; and a Faraday shield 92, disposed around the antenna, and arranged between the antenna and the dielectric enclosure, wherein the Faraday shield comprises a non-uniform opacity along an antenna axis of the antenna, wherein a first opacity of the Faraday shield at a first position (a position in the Faraday shield where there is no opening 98, shown in the modified Figs. 5A-5C below by the area not encircled by the rectangles) along the antenna axis is greater than a second opacity of the Faraday shield at a second position (a position in the Faraday shield where there is an opening 98, shown in the modified Figs. 5A-5C below by the area encircled by the rectangles and pointed by the arrows) along the antenna axis of the antenna; (see, for example, Figs. 4A-4B and 5A-5C, and their descriptions, Figs. 4A and Figs. 5A-5C are shown below).
PNG
media_image1.png
171
341
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
388
336
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the antenna assembly of the apparatus of Yeom et al. as to further comprise the claimed Faraday shield because such means is known and used in the art as a suitable means for effectively and efficiently transmit inductive coupling power from the antenna to the plasma region while minimizing capacitive coupling between the antenna and the plasma region.
Yeom et al. and Fink et al. do not expressly disclose the claimed Faraday shield configuration. Mahoney discloses the use of different Faraday shield configurations including a configuration in which the Faraday shield comprises a plurality of ribs 101, wherein the at least one rib comprises a first rib end and a second rib end facing one another along the circumferential path, wherein the first rib end and the second rib end are separated by a gap such that the at least one rib does not form a continuous ring (see, for example, Figs. 10-11, and their descriptions, Figs. 10-11 are shown below).
PNG
media_image3.png
441
352
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the Faraday shield of the apparatus of Yeom et al. modified by Fink et al. as to comprise the claimed Faraday shield configuration because such configuration is known and used it the art as a suitable configuration for effectively and efficiently control the capacitive coupling allowed through the shield. It should be further notice that in the apparatus of Yeom et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney at least one rib of the plurality of ribs would extend along a circumferential path of the antenna.
With respect to claims 2 and 10, it should be noted that the Faraday shield of the antenna assembly of the apparatus of Yeom et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney would be affix to an inner wall of the dielectric enclosure.
Regarding claim 4, it should be noted that the antenna assembly of the apparatus of Yeom et al. comprises a linear antenna, having a grounded end (end connected to ground), and a powered end (end connected to RF power), the linear antenna extending along the antenna axis; wherein the dielectric enclosure is elongated along the antenna axis (see, for example, Fig. 2 and its description, Fig. 2 shown above).
Regarding claims 5 and 12, it should be noted that Mahoney clearly discloses that the Faraday shield further comprises a spine 102 (see, for example, Fig. 11 of Mahoney above). It should be noted that in the apparatus of Yeom et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney, the spine would extend parallel to the antenna axis and is arranged to connect the plurality of ribs to one another.
Concerning claims 6 and 13, Yeom et al. further discloses that the antenna is a linear antenna comprising a hairpin structure, the hairpin structure comprising a first linear portion that extends from a powered end (the end where RF power is connected), a second linear portion that extends from the grounded end, and a connecting portion (the U shaped connecting section) connecting the first linear portion to the second linear portion, wherein the grounded end is disposed next to the powered end; (see, for example, Fig. 2 and its description, Fig. 2 is shown above). Additionally, the configuration of the claimed antenna is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the antenna is significant. It should also be noted that the side of the linear antenna where the grounded end and powered end are disposed comprises a higher voltage side of the linear antenna, and the side of the linear antenna where the connecting portion is located comprises a lower voltage region of the linear antenna, since the voltage would be higher at the powered end.
With respect to claims 7 and 14, it should be noted that in the apparatus of Yeom et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney, a first end surrounds the powered end of the linear antenna, and a second end surrounds the connecting portion of the linear antenna. As broadly claimed, the Faraday shield of the apparatus of Yeom et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney would exhibit a first opacity at the first end due to the presence of the first/top faraday shield rib and exhibits a second opacity at a second end where there is no faraday shield rib.
With respect to claim 9, it should be noted that Yeom et al. further discloses a processing system comprising a plasma chamber 10, wherein the antenna assembly is disposed within the plasma chamber, wherein the dielectric enclosure is elongated along the antenna axis, and wherein the antenna 32 is a linear antenna having a grounded end (end connected to ground) and a powered end (end connected to RF power), the linear antenna extending along an antenna axis; (see, for example, Fig. 2 above).
Regarding claim 10, it should be noted that in the apparatus of Yeom et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney, the Faraday shield is positioned on an inner wall of the dielectric enclosure.
Claim(s) 8 and 15is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeom et al., US 2004/0221814 in view of Fink et al., US 2003/0087488 and Mahoney, US 5,521,351, as applied to claims 1-2, 4-7, 9-10 and 12-14 above, and further in view of George et al., US 2004/0244691 or Khater et al., US 6,459,066 or Young et al., US 5,903,106.
Concerning claims 8 and 15, Yeom et al., Fink et al. and Mahoney, are applied as above but do not expressly disclose that the non-uniform opacity varies along the antenna axis as claimed. George et al. discloses a Faraday shield 470 having a non-uniform opacity that would vary along an antenna axis as claimed by the use of slots having a variation in their opening; (see, for example, Figs. 8a-8b, and their descriptions, modified Figs. 8a and 8b are shown below showing the slots having the opening variation within a rectangle).
PNG
media_image6.png
262
350
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
262
275
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Also, Khater et al. discloses a Faraday shield 1500 having a non-uniform opacity that would vary along an antenna axis as claimed by the use of reduction slots 610 spaced apart by a desired spacing; (see, for example, Figs. 6c, and its description, Fig. 6c is shown below).
PNG
media_image8.png
193
230
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Additionally, Young et al. discloses a Faraday shield 19 having a non-uniform opacity that would vary along an antenna axis as claimed by the use of reduction slots 33 having a variation in their openings and/or spaced apart by a desired spacing; (see, for example, Fig. 6, and its description, Fig. 6 is shown below).
PNG
media_image9.png
286
422
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of these disclosures, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the Faraday shield of the apparatus of Yeom et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney, as to have a non-uniform opacity that varies as claimed because such configuration is known and used in the art as a suitable configuration for effectively and efficiently affect the plasma density and radial uniformity over a range of plasma process parameters by moderating the RF penetration/transmission into the plasma chamber, and thereby optimize the apparatus and the method performed within the apparatus.
Claim(s) 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeom et al., US 2004/0221814 in view of Fink et al., US 2003/0087488 and Mahoney, US 5,521,351 and George et al., US 2004/0244691 or Khater et al., US 6,459,066 or Young et al., US 5,903,106, as applied to claims 8 and 15, and further in view of Godet et al., US 2015/0325410.
Regarding claim 16, Yeom et al., Fink et al. Mahoney, George et al., Khater et al., and Young et al. are applied as above, and Yeom et al. further discloses a processing system comprising a plasma chamber 10; wherein the antenna assembly is disposed within the plasma chamber, wherein the dielectric enclosure is elongated along the antenna axis, wherein the antenna 32 is a linear antenna having a grounded end (the end connected to ground) and a powered end (the end connected to RF power), the linear antenna extending along an antenna axis; and a substrate holder 20 (see, for example, Fig. 2 below).
PNG
media_image12.png
326
423
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Furthermore, and also with respect to claim 20, it should further be noted that an opacity of the Faraday shield of the apparatus of Yeom et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al. changes along the antenna axis. However, Yeom et al., Fink et al. and Mahoney do not expressly disclose the claimed extraction plate. Godet et al. discloses a plasma processing apparatus comprising an extraction plate 114, disposed on a side of a plasma chamber (see, for example, Fig. 1A and its description, Fig. 1A is shown below).
PNG
media_image10.png
390
373
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the apparatus of Yeom et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al., as to further comprise an extraction plate because such means is known and used in the art as a suitable means for effectively and efficiently extracting ions as an ion beam and direct the ion beam toward the substrate holder. It should be noted that the incorporation of the extraction plate of Godet et al. into the apparatus of Yeom et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al., would create a plasma chamber above the extraction plate, and a processing chamber below the extraction plate, wherein the processing chamber has a substrate holder.
Regarding claim 17, it should be noted that Mahoney clearly discloses that the Faraday shield further comprises a spine 102 (see, for example, Fig. 11 of Mahoney above). It should be noted that in the apparatus of Yeom et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al. and Godet et al., the spine would extend parallel to the antenna axis and is arranged to connect the plurality of ribs to one another.
Regarding claim 18, Yeom et al. further discloses that the antenna is a linear antenna comprising a hairpin structure, the hairpin structure comprising a first linear portion that extends from a powered end (the end where RF power is connected), a second linear portion that extends from the grounded end, and a connecting portion (the U shaped connecting section) connecting the first linear portion to the second linear portion, wherein the grounded end is disposed next to the powered end; (see, for example, Fig. 2 and its description, Fig. 2 is shown below). Additionally, the configuration of the claimed antenna is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the antenna is significant. It should also be noted that the side of the linear antenna where the grounded end and powered end are disposed comprises a higher voltage side of the linear antenna, and the side of the linear antenna where the connecting portion is located comprises a lower voltage region of the linear antenna, since the voltage would be higher at the powered end.
PNG
media_image12.png
326
423
media_image12.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 19, it should be noted that in the apparatus of Yeom et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al. and Godet et al., a first end surrounds the powered end of the linear antenna, and a second end surrounds the connecting portion of the linear antenna. Also as broadly claimed, the Faraday shield of the apparatus of Yeom et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al. and Godet et al. would exhibit a first opacity at the first end due to the presence of the first/top faraday shield rib and exhibits a second opacity at a second end where there is no faraday shield rib.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-7, 9-10, 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwakoke, US 2021/0022236 in view of Fink et al., US 2003/0087488 and Mahoney US 5,521,351.
With respect to independent claim 1, Iwakoke shows the invention substantially as claimed an antenna assembly, comprising an antenna 3; and a dielectric enclosure 10, surrounding the antenna; (see, for example, Fig. 3 and its disclosure, Fig. 3 shown below).
PNG
media_image13.png
321
523
media_image13.png
Greyscale
Iwakoke does not expressly disclose the claimed Faraday shield. Fink et al. discloses an antenna assembly comprising an antenna 90; a dielectric enclosure 96 surrounding the antenna; and a Faraday shield 92, disposed around the antenna, and arranged between the antenna and the dielectric enclosure, wherein the Faraday shield comprises a non-uniform opacity along an antenna axis of the antenna, wherein a first opacity of the Faraday shield at a first position (a position in the Faraday shield where there is no opening 98, shown in the modified Figs. 5A-5C below by the area not encircled by the rectangles) along the antenna axis is greater than a second opacity of the Faraday shield at a second position (a position in the Faraday shield where there is an opening 98, shown in the modified Figs. 5A-5C below by the area encircled by the rectangles and pointed by the arrows) along the antenna axis of the antenna; (see, for example, Figs. 4A-4B and 5A-5C, and their descriptions, Figs. 4A and Figs. 5A-5C are shown below).
PNG
media_image1.png
171
341
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
388
336
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the antenna assembly of the apparatus of Iwakoke as to further comprise the claimed Faraday shield because such means is known and used in the art as a suitable means for effectively and efficiently transmit inductive coupling power from the antenna to the plasma region while minimizing capacitive coupling between the antenna and the plasma region.
Iwakoke and Fink et al. do not expressly disclose the claimed Faraday shield configuration. Mahoney discloses the use of different Faraday shield configurations including a configuration in which the Faraday shield comprises a plurality of ribs 101, wherein the at least one rib comprises a first rib end and a second rib end facing one another along the circumferential path, wherein the first rib end and the second rib end are separated by a gap such that the at least one rib does not form a continuous ring (see, for example, Figs. 10-11, and their descriptions, Figs. 10-11 are shown below).
PNG
media_image3.png
441
352
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the Faraday shield of the apparatus of Iwakoke modified by Fink et al. as to comprise the claimed Faraday shield configuration because such configuration is known and used it the art as a suitable configuration for effectively and efficiently control the capacitive coupling allowed through the shield. It should be further notice that in the apparatus of Sakai et al. modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney at least one rib of the plurality of ribs would extend along a circumferential path of the antenna.
With respect to claims 2 and 10, it should be noted that the Faraday shield of the antenna assembly of the apparatus of Iwakoke modified by Fink et al. would be affix to an inner wall of the dielectric enclosure.
Regarding claim 4, it should be noted that the antenna assembly of the apparatus of Iwakoke comprises a linear antenna, having a grounded end 3b2, and a powered end 3a1, the linear antenna extending along the antenna axis; wherein the dielectric enclosure is elongated along the antenna axis (see, for example, Fig. 3 and its description, Fig. 3 shown above).
Regarding claims 5 and 12, it should be noted that Mahoney clearly discloses that the Faraday shield further comprises a spine 102 (see, for example, Fig. 11 of Mahoney above). It should be noted that in the apparatus of Iwakoke modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney, the spine would extend parallel to the antenna axis and is arranged to connect the plurality of ribs to one another.
Concerning claims 6 and 13, Iwakoke further discloses that the antenna is a linear antenna comprising a hairpin structure, the hairpin structure comprising a first linear portion 3(A) that extends from a powered end 3a1, a second linear portion that extends from the grounded end 3b2, and a connecting portion 12 connecting the first linear portion to the second linear portion, wherein the grounded end is disposed next to the powered end; (see, for example, Fig. 3 and its description, Fig. 3 is shown above). Additionally, the configuration of the claimed antenna is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the antenna is significant. It should also be noted that the side of the linear antenna where the grounded end and powered end are disposed comprises a higher voltage side of the linear antenna, and the side of the linear antenna where the connecting portion is located comprises a lower voltage region of the linear antenna, since the voltage would be higher at the powered end 3a1.
With respect to claims 7 and 14, it should be noted that in the apparatus of Iwakoke modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney, a first end surrounds the powered end of the linear antenna, and a second end surrounds the connecting portion of the linear antenna. As broadly claimed, the Faraday shield of the apparatus of Iwakoke modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney would exhibit a first opacity at the first end due to the presence of the first/top faraday shield rib and exhibits a second opacity at a second end where there is no faraday shield rib.
With respect to claim 9, it should be noted that Iwakoke further discloses a processing system comprising a plasma chamber 2, wherein the antenna assembly is disposed within the plasma chamber, wherein the dielectric enclosure is elongated along the antenna axis, and wherein the antenna 3 is a linear antenna having a grounded end 3b2 and a powered end 3a1, the linear antenna extending along an antenna axis; (see, for example, Fig. 2 below and Fig. 3 above).
PNG
media_image14.png
292
422
media_image14.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, it should be noted that in the apparatus of Iwakoke modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney, the Faraday shield is positioned on an inner wall of the dielectric enclosure.
Claim(s) 8 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwakoke, US 2021/0022236 in view of Fink et al., US 2003/0087488 and Mahoney, US 5,521,351, as applied to claims 1-2, 4-7, 9-10 and 12-14 above, and further in view of George et al., US 2004/0244691 or Khater et al., US 6,459,066 or Young et al., US 5,903,106.
Concerning claims 8 and 15, Iwakoke, Fink et al. and Mahoney, are applied as above but do not expressly disclose that the non-uniform opacity varies along the antenna axis as claimed. George et al. discloses a Faraday shield 470 having a non-uniform opacity that would vary along an antenna axis as claimed by the use of slots having a variation in their opening; (see, for example, Figs. 8a-8b, and their descriptions, modified Figs. 8a and 8b are shown below showing the slots having the opening variation within a rectangle).
PNG
media_image6.png
262
350
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
262
275
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Also, Khater et al. discloses a Faraday shield 1500 having a non-uniform opacity that would vary along an antenna axis as claimed by the use of reduction slots 610 spaced apart by a desired spacing; (see, for example, Figs. 6c, and its description, Fig. 6c is shown below).
PNG
media_image8.png
193
230
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Additionally, Young et al. discloses a Faraday shield 19 having a non-uniform opacity that would vary along an antenna axis as claimed by the use of reduction slots 33 having a variation in their openings and/or spaced apart by a desired spacing; (see, for example, Fig. 6, and its description, Fig. 6 is shown below).
PNG
media_image9.png
286
422
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of these disclosures, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the Faraday shield of the apparatus of Iwakoke modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney, as to have a non-uniform opacity that varies as claimed because such configuration is known and used in the art as a suitable configuration for effectively and efficiently affect the plasma density and radial uniformity over a range of plasma process parameters by moderating the RF penetration/transmission into the plasma chamber, and thereby optimize the apparatus and the method performed within the apparatus.
Claim(s) 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwakoke, US 2021/0022236 in view of Fink et al., US 2003/0087488 and Mahoney, US 5,521,351 and George et al., US 2004/0244691 or Khater et al., US 6,459,066 or Young et al., US 5,903,106, as applied to claims 8 and 15, and further in view of Godet et al., US 2015/0325410.
Regarding claim 16, Iwakoke, Fink et al., Mahoney, George et al., Khater et al., and Young et al. are applied as above, and Iwakoke further discloses a processing system comprising a plasma chamber 2; wherein the antenna assembly is disposed within the plasma chamber, wherein the dielectric enclosure is elongated along the antenna axis, wherein the antenna 3 is a linear antenna having a grounded end 3b2 and a powered end 3a1, the linear antenna extending along an antenna axis; and a substrate holder 6 (see, for example, Fig. 2 below).
PNG
media_image14.png
292
422
media_image14.png
Greyscale
Furthermore, and also with respect to claim 20, it should further be noted that an opacity of the Faraday shield of the apparatus of Iwakoke modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al. changes along the antenna axis. However, Yeom et al., Fink et al. and Mahoney do not expressly disclose the claimed extraction plate. Godet et al. discloses a plasma processing apparatus comprising an extraction plate 114, disposed on a side of a plasma chamber (see, for example, Fig. 1A and its description, Fig. 1A is shown below).
PNG
media_image10.png
390
373
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Therefore, in view of this disclosure, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the apparatus of Iwakoke modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al., as to further comprise an extraction plate because such means is known and used in the art as a suitable means for effectively and efficiently extracting ions as an ion beam and direct the ion beam toward the substrate holder. It should be noted that the incorporation of the extraction plate of Godet et al. into the apparatus of Iwakoke modified Fink et al. and Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al., would create a plasma chamber above the extraction plate, and a processing chamber below the extraction plate, wherein the processing chamber has a substrate holder.
Regarding claim 17, it should be noted that Mahoney clearly discloses that the Faraday shield further comprises a spine 102 (see, for example, Fig. 11 of Mahoney above). It should be noted that in the apparatus of Iwakoke modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al. and Godet et al., the spine would extend parallel to the antenna axis and is arranged to connect the plurality of ribs to one another.
Regarding claim 18, Iwakoke further discloses that the antenna is a linear antenna comprising a hairpin structure, the hairpin structure comprising a first linear portion 3(A) that extends from a powered end 3a1, a second linear portion that extends from the grounded end 3b2, and a connecting portion 12 connecting the first linear portion to the second linear portion, wherein the grounded end is disposed next to the powered end; (see, for example, Fig. 3 and its description, Fig. 3 is shown below). Additionally, the configuration of the claimed antenna is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the antenna is significant. It should also be noted that the side of the linear antenna where the grounded end and powered end are disposed comprises a higher voltage side of the linear antenna, and the side of the linear antenna where the connecting portion is located comprises a lower voltage region of the linear antenna, since the voltage would be higher at the powered end 3a1.
PNG
media_image13.png
321
523
media_image13.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 19, it should be noted that in the apparatus of Iwakoke modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al. and Godet et al., a first end surrounds the powered end of the linear antenna, and a second end surrounds the connecting portion of the linear antenna. Also as broadly claimed, the Faraday shield of the apparatus of Iwakoke modified by Fink et al. and Mahoney and George et al. or Khater et al. or Young et al. and Godet et al. would exhibit a first opacity at the first end due to the presence of the first/top faraday shield rib and exhibits a second opacity at a second end where there is no faraday shield rib.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-2, 4-10, and 12-20 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yeom et al. (US 2005/0199186) is cited for its teaching of a plasma processing apparatus having an antenna assembly comprising a linear antenna surrounded by a dielectric enclosure and disposed within a plasma chamber.
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 LUZ L ALEJANDRO whose telephone number is (571)272-1430. The examiner can normally be reached Monday and Thursday, 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m..
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Parviz Hassanzadeh can be reached at 571-272-1435. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LUZ L ALEJANDRO MULERO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
October 7, 2026
