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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Invention I in the reply filed on 12/18/2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claims 12-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Therefore, claims 1-11 have been fully considered in examination.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Paragraphs [0052], [0053], and [0060] recite numerical value that lack units. Therefore, the scope of the claim is unclear.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-11 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the
applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “a shortest distance from an end of the nozzle protrusion to the substrate.” The claim does not specify how the distance is measured or between which specific points of the nozzle protrusion and the substrate the distance is determined. Accordingly, the claim language is unclear such that the scope of the claim cannot be determined with reasonable certainty.
Claims 2-11 are also rejected being dependent on rejected claim 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-4 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nobuyuki (JP2002075978A), and further in view of Shimada (US20190360098A1).
Regarding claim 1, Nobuyuki (JP-2002075978-A) teaches a batch-type semiconductor manufacturing apparatus (Fig. 1, reaction tube 11) comprising:
a boat (Fig. 1, boat 13) on which a substrate (Fig. 1, wafer 12) is loaded in a first direction;
a nozzle extending primarily in the first direction and configured provide a process gas to the substrate therethrough (Fig. 1, nozzle 15):
a nozzle tube at least partially surrounding the nozzle and comprising a gas injection hole configured to inject the process gas toward the substrate (Fig. 1, main pipe part 16): and
a nozzle protrusion connected to the gas injection hole and extending primarily in a second direction (Fig. 1, injection port 17a),
wherein a shortest distance from an end of the nozzle protrusion to the substrate is greater than 0 mm and less than 9 mm (Fig. 1, injection port 17a is located in the vicinity of about 1 cm from the semiconductor wafer 12).
But, Nobuyuki does not disclose an inner tube at least partiality covering the boat.
However, Shimada teaches an inner tube at least partiality covering the boat (Fig. 4, inner tube 12).
In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the vertical reaction furnace of Nobuyuki (JP2002075978A) to include the inner tube structure disclosed by Shimada (US20190360098A1). The combination would allow the second source gas to be supplied more uniformly and reduce particles generated by decomposition of the second source gas, as disclosed by Shimada (para. [0114]).
PNG
media_image1.png
548
767
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Nobuyuki in view of Shimada teaches The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the nozzle protrusion is disposed within a slit opening stacked in the first direction, as disclosed in Shimada (Para [0042], supply slits 235c stacked in the H direction).
Regarding claim 3, Nobuyuki in view of Shimada teaches the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising a slit (Para [0042], supply slits 235c) and a slit opening (supply hole) which are stacked in the first direction along a sidewall of the boa, as disclosed in Shimada (Fig. 4, supply slits 235c and supply hole are stacked in the vertical direction, H).
Regarding claim 4, Nobuyuki in view of Shimada teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the gas injection hole comprises an inlet having a first diameter and an outlet having a second diameter,
wherein the process gas is introduced into the inlet through the nozzle, and
wherein the process gas is discharged from the inlet toward the outlet, as disclosed in Shimada (Para [0098] and Fig. 5 , the process gases flow over the plurality of the wafers 200, and inert gas is ejected through the plurality of the ejection holes 234a of the gas nozzle 340a in a direction parallel to the upper surfaces of the plurality of the wafers. Therefore, each ejection hole has an inlet (introduction part) and outlet (discharge part). Both the inlet and outlet are circular opening, each having a radius).
Regarding claim 9, Nobuyuki in view of Shimada teaches the apparatus of claim 2, wherein the slit opening includes a plurality of slit openings, the nozzle protrusion includes a plurality of nozzle protrusions, and the number of slit openings in the plurality of slit openings and the number of nozzle protrusions in the plurality of nozzle protrusions are the same, as disclosed in Shimada (Para [0046-0054] and Fig. 6, number of plurality of the supply slits 235c and ejection hole 234c are the same ).
Regarding claim 10, Nobuyuki in view of Shimada teaches the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising an auxiliary nozzle, as disclosed in Shimada (Fig. 6, gas nozzle 340b).
Regarding claim 11, Nobuyuki in view of Shimada teaches the apparatus of claim10, wherein the auxiliary nozzle includes a plurality of auxiliary nozzles, as disclosed in Shimada (Fig. 6, gas nozzles 340b and 340d).
Claims 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nobuyuki (JP2002075978A) in view of Shimada (US20190360098A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Young (US5851294A).
Regarding claim 5, Nobuyuki in view of Shimada teaches the apparatus of claim 4 respectively, but does not specify the first diameter is greater than the second diameter.
However, Young teaches first diameter is greater than the second diameter (Fig. 7C, the inlet 70 and outlet 72 have a diameter of about 0.5 mm to 0.7 mm and the nozzle has a minimum diameter of about 0.2 mm to 0.3 mm).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the vertical reaction furnace of Nobuyuki (JP2002075978A) to include the nozzle structure in injection system disclosed by Young (US5851294A). The combination would provide greater control over the gas flow through the nozzle and improve the efficiency of the deposition process, as disclosed by Young (Fig. 7C).
Regarding claim 6, Nobuyuki in view of Shimada teaches the apparatus of claim 4 respectively, but does not specify a value obtained by dividing the second diameter by the first diameter is 0.5 to 0.75.
However, Young teaches a value obtained by dividing the second diameter by the first diameter is 0.5 to 0.75 (Fig. 7C, the inlet 70 and outlet 72 have a diameter of about 0.5 mm to 0.7 mm and the nozzle 34 has a minimum diameter of about 0.2 mm to 0.3 mm).
Regarding claim 7, Nobuyuki in view of Shimada teaches the apparatus of claim 1 respectively, but does not specify a flow passage surface defined as a surface where the gas injection hole and the nozzle tube meet is curved.
However, Young teaches a flow passage surface defined as a surface where the gas injection hole and the nozzle tube meet is curved (Fig. 7C, curved profile nozzle at the inlet).
Regarding claim 8, Nobuyuki in view of Shimada and Young teaches the apparatus of claim 7, wherein a curvature of the flow passage surface is greater than 0 mm and less than 0.5 mm, as disclosed in Young (Fig. 7C, the inlet 70 and outlet 72 have a diameter of about 0.5 mm to 0.7 mm and the nozzle 34 has a minimum diameter of about 0.2 mm to 0.3 mm. Given that the nozzle dimensions disclosed by Young are on the order of sub-millimeter values, the curvature of the curved profile nozzle at the inlet would reasonably be within a sub-millimeter range, which is greater than 0 mm and less than 0.5 mm).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Sakashita (US11993848B2) teaches a gas nozzle extending vertically inward of an inner wall of a processing container having a substantially cylindrical shape, includes a plurality of first gas holes provided at intervals in a longitudinal direction; and a second gas hole provided at a tip of the gas nozzle and oriented toward a side opposite to a side in which the plurality of first gas holes are provided in a plan view from the longitudinal direction, wherein the second gas hole has an opening area larger than an opening area of each of the first gas holes.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAHAE KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-1844. 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, Fernando Toledo can be reached at (571) 271-1867. 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.
/FERNANDO L TOLEDO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2897
/JAHAE KIM/ Examiner, Art Unit 2897