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 § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-4, 6-10, 12, 14-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
As to claim 1 and the dependent claims:
The applicants amended claim 1 to recite:
“a second connection line between the RPS and the interior volume, the second connection line penetrating the sidewall below the substrate support and including a second valve at the sidewall configured to isolate the interior volume from the second connection line”.
Such is not supported by the original disclosure.
The original disclosure fails to recite a valve that isolates the interior volume from the line penetrating the sidewall.
See at least Figure 2 and the related description.
PNG
media_image1.png
780
584
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The second valve 142 is clearly shown as separating the line 146, which penetrates the side wall from the line 140.
No disclosure of the valve that separates the line penetrating the wall from the interior volume can be found in the original disclosure.
It is noted that the applicants allege that the support for the amendment is provided by [0017-19], [0036], [0040], Figures 1 and 2 and original claim 4.
This is not persuasive neither the cited parts of the original disclosure, nor any other part of the original disclosure supports the recitation of the valve that separates the line penetrating the wall from the interior volume of the chamber.
At best the original disclosure supports the second valve 142, which separates the interior volume 118 from line 140, which is a line between the RPS 120/first valve 312 and the second valve 142.
No valves that separate the interior volume 118 from line 146 (the line that penetrates the wall of the chamber is supported by the original disclosure.
To separate the line “penetrating the sidewall” the valve has to be on the inside side of the interior volume 118, between the interior volume 118 and the line 146.
Such is not supported by the original disclosure.
In contrast, the original disclosure clearly teaches that the valve 142 is connected to the interior volume 118 by line 146, which penetrates the side wall of the chamber.
As to claim 15 and the dependent claims:
The applicants amended claim 15 to recite:
“controlling a second valve at the sidewall of the chamber body to isolate the interior volume from the second connection line, wherein the recovery gas reduces an amount of recovery time to recover the processing chamber”.
The claim also recites “the second connection line penetrating the sidewall of the chamber body below the support surface”.
Such is not supported by the original disclosure.
Please, see the analysis provided above with respect to claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 17 is indefinite/incomplete because it appears that some text is missing in the claim in the clause “claim 16, the first valve”.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/28/2026 has been considered by the examiner.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/21/2026 has been considered by the examiner.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/13/2025 has been considered by the examiner.
The information disclosure statement filed 11/11/2025 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.97(c) because it lacks the timing fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(p). It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicants amended the claims and allege that the amended claims are allowable.
This is not persuasive for the reasons provided in the rejections above.
The amended claims have been examined and are the subject of the rejections applied above.
The art rejections presented in the previous Office action have been withdrawn in view of the amendments made to the claims. The referenced rejections may be reinstated upon placing the claims in the correspondence with the requirements of 35 USC 112(a).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER MARKOFF whose telephone number is (571)272-1304. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:30 pm.
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, Michael Barr can be reached at 571-272-1414. 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.
/ALEXANDER MARKOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711