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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/08/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicants' amendment of the claims, filed on 06/08/2026, in response to the rejection of claims 1-7 from the final office action, mailed on 03/09/2026, by amending claim 1, is acknowledged and will be addressed below.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 8-19 remain withdrawn from consideration as pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
(1) The “wherein, in the first processing space, a chemical vapor phase liquid film forming process is performed on the substrate, and wherein, in the second processing space, an annealing process is performed on the substrate on which the chemical vapor phase liquid film forming process has been performed in the first processing space” of Claim 1 is not clear.
First, it is not clear what the “vapor phase liquid” means. Does it mean the film is existed in status of both vapor and liquid? It is considered the final product of the film is a solid status, thus it is not clear what the film as recited means.
Further, the applicants’ disclosures fail to present detailed description for the recited feature, the metes and bounds for the claimed subject matter cannot be clearly determined.
For the purpose of examination, when the process forms a film, it will be considered meeting the limitation.
Further, to clarify the record,
The limitation merely recites a functional result, which is the “perform chemical vapor phase liquid film forming process” and “perform annealing process” without further limiting for what structural components for each processing space is required.
The limitation is an intended use and is given patentable weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the intended use, see the MPEP citations below.
For instance, without detailed structural components,
When A chamber is provided, use of the A chamber for “a” process or “b” process is merely different use.
Similarly, when A and B chambers are provided, use of the A chamber for “a” process and use of the B chamber for “b” process, and also vice versa, are also merely different uses.
Consequently, when an apparatus of a prior art teaches the recited chamber having plural processing spaces and further each space is independently controllable for process, it will be considered meeting the limitation.
MPEP citations:
It has been held that claim language that simply specifies an intended use or field of use for the invention generally will not limit the scope of a claim (See MPEP 2106; Walter, 618 F.2d at 769, 205 USPQ at 409). When apparatus is capable of performing such functions, it is considered to meet the claim limitations. Additionally, in apparatus claims, intended use must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim (See MPEP 2111.02, 2115; In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458,459 (CCPA 1963). When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent (See MPEP 2112.01; In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430,433 (CCPA 1977). It has further been held that expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim. Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969); and the inclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. In re Young, 75 F.2d 966, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963)). While features of an apparatus may be described either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus MUST be distinguished from prior art in terms of structure rather than function (See MPEP §2114). 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. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987) (See MPEP §2114).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shindo (US 20180342409, hereafter ‘409) in view of Kim (US 20170040204, hereafter ‘204). US 20150332912 is used as an evidence for common knowledge.
Regarding Claim 1,
‘409 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 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]),
and
wherein, in the first processing space, a chemical vapor phase liquid film forming process is performed on the substrate, and wherein, in the second processing space, an annealing process is performed on the substrate on which the chemical vapor phase liquid film forming process has been performed in the first processing space ([0084], forming a film and an annealing module for heating the wafer W and each chamber can have a same process and different process. Further, Fig. 4, [0049] and [0052], the mounting tables 67A and 67B each have individually controlled gas showerheads 77, high frequency power supplies 59, and heaters 70).
‘409 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 (‘204, 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 (‘204, 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).
‘204 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 ‘204 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 (‘204, [0043]).
To clarify the record, it is commonly well-known in the art that, when a chamber has a plurality of processing stations is provided, each processing station can be used for different process;
For instance, see [0144] of US 20150332912 disclosing “The depicted processing chamber 214 shown in FIG. 2A provides four process stations, 201, 202, 203, and 204. Each station has a heated pedestal (shown at 218 for process station 901) and gas line inlets. It will be appreciated that in some embodiments, each process station may have different or multiple purposes. For example, in some embodiments, a process station may be switchable between an ALD process mode and a CVD process mode. Additionally or alternatively, in some embodiments, processing chamber 214 may include one or more matched pairs of ALD/CVD process stations”.
Consequently, each station of ‘409 is clearly capable of performing different processes, as recited.
Further, 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” 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 ‘409 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,
‘409 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 ‘409 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,
‘409 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 ‘409 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,
‘409 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,
‘409 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 ‘409 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,
‘409 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 ‘409 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,
‘409 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 ‘409 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
Applicants’ arguments filed on 06/08/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In regard to the 35 USC103 rejection of claim 1, the applicants argue the cited references fails to contemplate or disclose the amended feature of claim 1, see the page 13.
This argument is found not persuasive and the examiner maintains the cited references clearly teach the newly added feature, as discussed in the claim rejection above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AIDEN Y LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1440. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 9am-5pm PT.
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 on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AIDEN LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Prosecution Insights