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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 12/12/2025 has been entered. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 09/16/2025.
Claim Status
Claims 1-19 are pending.
Claims 1, 3, and 7 are currently amended.
Claims 8-19 are currently withdrawn.
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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shindo (US 20180342409 A1), further in view of Kim (US 20170040204 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Shindo teaches a substrate processing apparatus for processing a substrate (Fig. 1, [0028], substrate processing apparatus 1), comprising:
a vacuum transfer chamber having a vacuum transfer space defined therein while being kept in a vacuum atmosphere (Fig. 1, [0029], vacuum transfer module 4 forms a vacuum atmosphere and transfers the wafers W within housing 41,[0039]), and including a substrate transfer mechanism provided in the vacuum transfer space and configured to collectively hold and transfer a plurality of substrates with a substrate holder (Fig. 1, [0045], transfer unit 51 is provided in housing 41 and holds/transfers wafers W on supporting bodies 56 of wafer supporting unit 55); and
a processing chamber having a plurality of processing spaces defined therein while being kept in the vacuum atmosphere (Fig. 1, [0048]-[0049], processing module 6 has plural mounting tables 67A and 67B upon which wafers are processed, and vacuum pump 65 creates a vacuum atmosphere within processing module 6), and connected to the vacuum transfer chamber (Fig. 1, [0041]-[0043], interface plate 46 connects processing module 6 and vacuum transfer module 4),
wherein the processing chamber includes a first loading/unloading port provided on a side of the vacuum transfer chamber and configured to allow the vacuum transfer space and the plurality of processing spaces to communicate with each other (Fig. 1, [0048], transfer port 62 is formed within the wall of processing module 6 that is shared with vacuum transfer module 4, allowing for the wafers W to be transferred between the modules),
wherein the plurality of processing spaces include a first processing space (Fig. 1, [0048]-[0049], processing module 6 has plural mounting tables 67A upon which wafers are processed) in which a process is performed on the substrate loaded into the first processing space through the loading/unloading port, and a second processing space (Fig. 1, [0048]-[0049], processing module 6 has plural mounting tables 67B upon which wafers are processed) in which a process is performed on the substrate subjected to the first process,
wherein the first processing space and the second processing space are arranged in a substrate loading/unloading direction in which the substrate is loaded and unloaded via the first loading/unloading port by the substrate transfer mechanism (Fig. 1, [0043], [0048], [0059], wafers W are transferred from vacuum transfer module 4 to mounting tables 67A and 67B in processing module 6 through transfer ports 46A and transfer port 62 by wafer supporting unit 55 and movement of lifting pins 75, and are also transferred out of processing module 6 by unit 55 and pins 75, [0060]),
wherein the first process is different from the second process (Fig. 4, [0052], mounting tables 67A and 67B each have individually controlled gas showerheads 77, high frequency power supplies 59, and heaters 70, [0049]),
and
wherein the substrate holder of the substrate transfer mechanism has a length that extends over the first processing space and the second processing space (Fig. 1, [0059], wafers W are transferred onto mounting tables 67A and 67B in processing module 6 via wafer supporting unit 55, and the arrangement of the wafers W supported by the supporting unit 55 corresponds to the arrangement of the mounting tables 67A and 67B, where the wafer support unit 55 can transfer the wafers W all at one time, [0046]-[0047]).
Shindo fails to teach wherein the processing chamber further includes a second loading/unloading port provided between the first processing space and the second processing space and configured to allow the first processing space and the second processing space to communicate with each other (Kim, Fig. 1, [0042]-[0043], processing chamber 130a has plural stations for substrates arranged in a 2x2 matrix where the processing chamber may further include barrier walls for isolating environments in the processing chambers from each other while still being configured to open at least partially when loading/unloading the substrates and to close when processing the substrates), and
wherein the first processing space and the second processing space are arranged in a substrate loading/unloading direction in which the substrate is loaded and unloaded via the second loading/unloading ports by the substrate transfer mechanism (Kim, Fig. 1, [0042]-[0043], processing chamber 130a has plural stations for substrates arranged in a 2x2 matrix where the processing chamber may further include barrier walls for isolating environments in the processing chambers from each other while still being configured to open at least partially when loading/unloading the substrates and to close when processing the substrates).
Kim is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because it is 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 utilized the teachings of Kim and apply barrier walls with transfer openings as it would allow for different environments for processing the substrates while still having a same shared processing chamber (Kim, [0043]).
To clarify the record, the limitations “in which a first process is performed on the substrate loaded into the first processing space through the first loading/unloading port, and a second processing space in which a second process is performed on the substrate subjected to the first process” and “wherein the first process is different from the second process” 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 apparatus of Shindo has a transfer unit 51 with supporting bodies 56 that support four wafers at once, extending and retracting over two rows of processing spaces containing mounting tables 67A and 67B, delivering and removing wafers to the mounting tables via vertical movement of pins 75A, where supporting bodies 56 travel over both processing spaces linearly, and where controller 10 controls the vertical movement of the pins 75 and operations of the transfer unit ([0055]), thereby being capable of meeting the above claim limitations. Additionally, the mounting tables 67A and 67B each have individually controlled gas showerheads, high frequency power supplies, and heaters via the controller, thereby being structurally capable of meeting the claim limitations. 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 2, Shindo teaches wherein the substrate holder is configured to move in the wafer loading/unloading direction after receiving the substrate subjected to the first process inside the first processing space, so that the substrate is transferred to the second processing space without passing through the vacuum transfer space (Fig. 1, [0043], [0048], [0059], wafers W are transferred from vacuum transfer module 4 to mounting tables 67A and 67B in processing module 6 through transfer ports 46A and transfer port 62 by wafer supporting unit 55 and movement of lifting pins 75, and are also transferred out of processing module 6 by unit 55 and pins 75, [0060], where the wafers W that were on mounting tables 67B are located over mounting tables 67A while still within the processing module 6).
To clarify the record, the limitation “wherein the substrate holder is configured to…“ 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 apparatus of Shindo has a transfer unit 51 with supporting bodies 56 that support four wafers at once, extending and retracting over two rows of processing spaces containing mounting tables 67A and 67B, delivering and removing wafers to the mounting tables via vertical movement of pins 75A, where supporting bodies 56 travel over both processing spaces linearly, and where controller 10 controls the vertical movement of the pins 75 and operations of the transfer unit ([0055]), thereby being capable of meeting the above claim limitations. 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 3, Shindo teaches wherein a delivery of the substrate subjected to the first process with respect to the substrate holder inside the first processing space and a delivery of the substrate subjected to the second process with respect to the substrate holder inside the second processing space are performed at a same timing (Fig. 1, [0059], wafers W are transferred onto mounting tables 67A and 67B in processing module 6 via wafer supporting unit 55 at one time, and the arrangement of the wafers W supported by the supporting unit 55 corresponds to the arrangement of the mounting tables 67A and 67B, [0046]-[0047]).
To clarify the record, the limitation above 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 apparatus of Shindo has a transfer unit 51 with supporting bodies 56 that support four wafers at once, extending and retracting over two rows of processing spaces containing mounting tables 67A and 67B, delivering and removing wafers to the mounting tables via vertical movement of pins 75A, where supporting bodies 56 travel over both processing spaces linearly, and where controller 10 controls the vertical movement of the pins 75 and operations of the transfer unit ([0055]), thereby being capable of meeting the above claim limitations. Additionally, the mounting tables 67A and 67B each have individually controlled gas showerheads, high frequency power supplies, and heaters via the controller. 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 4, Shindo teaches wherein the first processing space is located on a rear side of the vacuum transfer chamber, and the second processing space is located on a front side of the vacuum transfer chamber (Fig. 1, [0049], processing module 6 has plural mounting tables 67A and 67B, where mounting tables 67A are located closest to the container wall 61 connected to vacuum transfer module 4, and mounting tables 67B are located on container wall 61 located opposite from vacuum transfer module 4).
Regarding claim 5, Shindo teaches wherein the substrate holder is configured to hold a substrate subjected to the second process in addition to the substrate subjected to the first process, when transferring the substrate subjected to the first process from the first processing space to the second processing space (Fig. 1, [0059]-[0060], following completion of processing, wafers W are transferred out of processing module 6 by unit 55 and pins 75, where the wafers W that were on mounting tables 67B are located over mounting tables 67A while still within the processing module 6, and the wafers processed on mounting tables 67A remain on supporting arms 56).
To clarify the record, the limitation “wherein the substrate holder is configured to…“ 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 apparatus of Shindo has a transfer unit 51 with supporting bodies 56 that support four wafers at once, extending and retracting over two rows of processing spaces containing mounting tables 67A and 67B, delivering and removing wafers to the mounting tables via vertical movement of pins 75A, where supporting bodies 56 travel over both processing spaces linearly, and where controller 10 controls the vertical movement of the pins 75 and operations of the transfer unit ([0055]), thereby being capable of meeting the above claim limitations. 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, Shindo teaches wherein the substrate holder is configured to further receive the substrate subjected to the second process inside the second processing space at a timing of receiving the substrate subjected to the first process inside the first processing space (Fig. 1, [0059]-[0060], following completion of processing, the four wafers W that have been subjected to processing are transferred to the wafer supporting unit 55 by the vertical movement of the elevating pins 75 in the processing module 6).
To clarify the record, the limitation “wherein the substrate holder is configured to…“ 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 apparatus of Shindo has a transfer unit 51 with supporting bodies 56 that support four wafers at once, extending and retracting over two rows of processing spaces containing mounting tables 67A and 67B, delivering and removing wafers to the mounting tables via vertical movement of pins 75A, where supporting bodies 56 travel over both processing spaces linearly, and where controller 10 controls the vertical movement of the pins 75 and operations of the transfer unit ([0055]), thereby being capable of meeting the above claim limitations. 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 7, Shindo teaches wherein the substrate transfer mechanism is configured to hold and transfer only a new substrate to be subjected to the first process with the substrate holder to the first processing space in a state in which the substrate subjected to the first process is located in the second processing space (Fig. 1, [0043], [0048], [0059], wafers W are transferred from vacuum transfer module 4 to mounting tables 67A and 67B in processing module 6 through transfer ports 46A and transfer port 62 by wafer supporting unit 55 and movement of lifting pins 75, and are also transferred out of processing module 6 by unit 55 and pins 75, [0060], where supporting arms 56 pass over mounting tables 67A and 67B during transfer operations).
To clarify the record, the limitation “wherein the substrate holder is configured to…“ 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 apparatus of Shindo has a transfer unit 51 with supporting bodies 56 that support four wafers at once, extending and retracting over two rows of processing spaces containing mounting tables 67A and 67B, delivering and removing wafers to the mounting tables via vertical movement of pins 75A, where supporting bodies 56 travel over both processing spaces linearly, where controller 10 controls the vertical movement of the pins 75 and operations of the transfer unit ([0055]), and where the transfer unit receives unprocessed wafers W from load-lock module 3 from arranged supporting portions 34 [0058], thereby being capable of meeting the above claim limitations. 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).
Response to Arguments
In the Applicant’s response filed 12/12/2025, the Applicant traverses the drawing objection to Figure 7 from the Non-Final Office Aciton mailed 09/16/2025. The Examiner withdraws the objection.
In the Applicant’s response filed 12/12/2025, the Applicant asserts that none of the cited prior art, particularly Shindo in view of Kim, teach the claim limitations “wherein the processing chamber further includes a second loading/unloading port provided between the first processing space and the second processing space and configured to allow the first processing space and the second processing space to communicate with each other” and “wherein the first process is different from the second process” of independent claim 1 as newly amended. The Examiner has carefully considered the arguments but does not find them to be persuasive.
The Applicant asserts that reference Kim fails to teach a second loading/unloading port provided between the first processing space and second processing space, stating the Kim “merely discloses that the plurality of processing chambers 130a, 130b, 130c, and 130d are partitioned from one another. However, Kim is silent on any transfer port for partitioning multiple stations within each processing chamber 130a, 130b, 130c, and 130d”. The Examiner points to paragraphs [0042]-[0043] of Kim (and annotated Fig. 1 below) which teaches that a plurality of chamber stations are provided in each processing chamber (for instance, plurality of stations within processing chamber 130a, labeled in Fig. 1 below), and that the processing chamber stations may further include barrier walls (dotted lines in Fig 1 below) for isolating environments in the processing chambers from each other, and that those barrier walls may be configured to open at least partially when loading/unloading the substrates and to close when processing the substrates, thereby being capable of meeting the claim limitation.
PNG
media_image1.png
543
401
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The Applicant asserts that reference Shindo fails to teach “wherein the first process is different from the second process”. As noted in the 103 rejections section above, the Examiner considers such a limitation as intended use and is given patentable weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the intended use. The apparatus of Shindo the mounting tables 67A and 67B each have individually controlled gas showerheads, high frequency power supplies, and heaters via the controller, thereby being structurally capable of meeting the claim limitations wherein the process performed at each mounting table can be different.
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 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