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 04/10/2026 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 01/13/2026.
Claim Status
Claims 1-17 are pending.
Claims 1-2, 13, and 16-17 are currently amended.
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, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Macionczyk (CN 108070825 A, using previously attached English machine translation), in view of Kusunoki (KR 20140093622 A, using previously attached English machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Macionczyk teaches a film formation device (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L342, coating apparatus 1) comprising:
a film formation chamber in which at least a film formation material and a film formation target are provided (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, vacuum chamber 2 for vaporizing a vapor deposition material onto a substrate 3), wherein the film formation chamber can be set to a predetermined film formation atmosphere (Macionczyk, L355-256, chamber 2 has a pump for creating a pressure therein);
a hearth liner provided inside the film formation chamber to accommodate the film formation material (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L394-397, crucible liner 31 receives material 11, L374-375);
a heating source provided inside the film formation chamber to heat the film formation material accommodated in the hearth liner (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L367-L372, evaporation device 20 is located in chamber 2 and vaporizes material 11 in crucible 31 via electron beam 21); and
a material supply chamber having a material-filled unit that is arranged above the hearth liner and filled with the film formation material in a granular shape to supply to the hearth liner (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L358-362, replenishing device 40 is located above crucible 31 and contains evaporation material 11) wherein the material supply chamber is connected to the film formation chamber via a communication path (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L406-423, storage container 41),
wherein the communication path has an upper end provided at a replenishment position of the material-filled unit (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L425-430, storage container 41 is prefilled through top opening in advance) and a lower end provided at a replenishment position of the hearth liner (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L432-440, storage container 41 has second opening 62 which is located above replenishing position 34).
Macionczyk fails to teach a material supply chamber separated from the film formation chamber, wherein the material supply chamber having a gate valve and configured to be set to a predetermined pressure atmosphere,
wherein after inside of the material supply chamber is set to the predetermined pressure atmosphere in a state in which the film formation chamber is set to the film formation atmosphere, the gate valve is opened to allow the granular film formation material filling the material-filled unit to pass through the communication path by the film formation material's own weight, and the film formation material is supplied to the hearth liner, and
wherein the communication path has an upper end coupled with a chamber case of the material supply chamber and provided at a replenishment position of the material-filled unit and a lower end coupled with a chamber case of the film formation chamber and provided at a replenishment position of the hearth liner, wherein the gate valve is disposed between the upper end and the lower end of the communication path.
However, Kusunoki teaches a material supply chamber separated from the film formation chamber, wherein the material supply chamber having a gate valve and configured to be set to a predetermined pressure atmosphere (Kusunoki, Fig. 9, [0074], relay chamber 210 is separate from and connected to process chamber 100 via vacuum valve 220-1 where relay chamber 210 is evacuated and maintained in high vacuum), and
wherein after inside of the material supply chamber is set to the predetermined pressure atmosphere in a state in which the film formation chamber is set to the film formation atmosphere (Kusunoki, Fig. 9, [0074], relay chamber 210 is evacuated and maintained in high vacuum, and process chamber 100 is maintained in vacuum, [0050]), the gate valve is opened to allow the granular film formation material filling the material-filled unit to pass through the communication path by the film formation material's own weight, and the film formation material is supplied to the hearth liner (Kusunoki, Fig. 9, [0076]-[0080], vacuum valve 220-1 is opened and material 2 is supplied from supply device 230 to hopper 29 to evaporation source 30).
Kusunoki is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of substrate processing. It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have modified the replenishing device of Macionczyk to relocate outside of the process chamber in the manner taught by Kusunoki as doing so would enable performing of vapor deposition for a long time without having to provide for a large capacity material supply holder within the process chamber (Kusunoki, [0077]), thereby saving costs by reducing the needed size of the process chamber (Kusunoki, [0005]).
To clarify the record, the Examiner construes ‘film formation material’ and ‘film formation target’ as a material or article worked upon by the apparatus. The courts have held that such an inclusion does not impart patentability to the claims. See MPEP 2115.
While Kusunoki fails to explicitly teach wherein the communication path has an upper end coupled with a chamber case of the material supply chamber and provided at a replenishment position of the material-filled unit and a lower end coupled with a chamber case of the film formation chamber and provided at a replenishment position of the hearth liner, wherein the gate valve is disposed between the upper end and the lower end of the communication path, the combination of Kusunoki and Macionczyk teaches the above limitations.
The replenishment device 40 of Macionczyk teaches a communication path comprised of upper end 41 and lower end 43, with the gate 42 disposed between the ends that blocks or allows deposition material to flow through the path (Macionczyk, Fig. 1). Kusunoki teaches a relay chamber 210 where vacuum valve 220-1 blocks or allows material to flow through the path (Kusunoki, Fig. 9). One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify the replenishing device of Macionczyk to be relocated outside of the process chamber in the manner taught by Kusunoki as doing so would enable performing of vapor deposition for a long time without having to provide for a large capacity material supply holder within the process chamber (Kusunoki, [0077]), thereby saving costs by reducing the needed size of the process chamber (Kusunoki, [0005]). The Examiner regards the level of ordinary skill in the art as a highly educated, highly trained, highly skilled engineer with a breadth of knowledge spanning at least chemistry, physics, electronics. When performing such a modification, in order to maintain the benefits including pressure separation, the upper portion of the communication path of Macionczyk defined as the path located above the valve, would necessarily be coupled to the material supply chamber, and the lower portion of the communication path would be necessarily coupled to the process chamber.
Regarding claim 16, Macionczyk teaches a film formation device (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L342, coating apparatus 1) comprising: a film formation chamber in which at least a film formation material and a film formation target are provided (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, vacuum chamber 2 for vaporizing a vapor deposition material onto a substrate 3), wherein the film formation chamber can be set to a predetermined film formation atmosphere (Macionczyk, L355-256, chamber 2 has a pump for creating a pressure therein);
a hearth liner provided inside the film formation chamber to accommodate the film formation material (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L394-397, crucible liner 31 receives material 11, L374-375);
a heating source provided inside the film formation chamber to heat the film formation material accommodated in the hearth liner (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L367-L372, evaporation device 20 is located in chamber 2 and vaporizes material 11 in crucible 31 via electron beam 21); and
a material supply chamber having a material-filled unit that is filled with the film formation material to supply to the hearth liner (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L358-362, replenishing device 40 is located above crucible 31 and contains evaporation material 11), wherein the material supply chamber is connected to the film formation chamber via a communication path (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L406-423, storage container 41),
wherein the material supply chamber is provided with a plurality of material-filled units, and at least two material-filled units are filled with different types of film formation materials (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L129-134, plurality of crucibles having different materials can be provided, where plural replenishing devices 40 can be provided, L414-415).
However, Macionczyk fails to teach a material supply chamber separated from the film formation chamber, wherein the material supply chamber having a gate valve and configured to be set to a predetermined pressure atmosphere,
wherein after inside of the material supply chamber is set to the predetermined pressure atmosphere in a state in which the film formation chamber is set to the film formation atmosphere, the gate valve is opened to supply the film formation material filling the material-filled unit to the hearth liner via the communication path, and wherein the communication path has an upper end coupled with a chamber case of the material supply chamber and provided at a replenishment position of the material-filled unit and a lower end coupled with a chamber case of the film formation chamber and provided at a replenishment position of the hearth liner, wherein the gate valve is disposed between the upper end and the lower end of the communication path.
However, Kusunoki teaches a material supply chamber separated from the film formation chamber, wherein the material supply chamber having a gate valve and configured to be set to a predetermined pressure atmosphere (Kusunoki, Fig. 9, [0074], relay chamber 210 is connected to process chamber 100 via vacuum valve 220-1 where relay chamber 210 is evacuated and maintained in high vacuum),
wherein after inside of the material supply chamber is set to the predetermined pressure atmosphere in a state in which the film formation chamber is set to the film formation atmosphere (Kusunoki, Fig. 9, [0074], relay chamber 210 is evacuated and maintained in high vacuum, and process chamber 100 is maintained in vacuum, [0050]), the gate valve is opened to supply the film formation material filling the material-filled unit to the hearth liner via the communication path (Kusunoki, Fig. 9, [0076]-[0080], vacuum valve 220-1 is opened and material 2 is supplied from supply device 230 to hopper 29 to evaporation source 30).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have modified the replenishing device of Macionczyk to relocate outside of the process chamber in the manner taught by Kusunoki as doing so would enable performing of vapor deposition for a long time without having to provide for a large capacity material supply holder within the process chamber (Kusunoki, [0077]), thereby saving costs by reducing the needed size of the process chamber (Kusunoki, [0005]).
While Kusunoki fails to explicitly teach wherein the communication path has an upper end coupled with a chamber case of the material supply chamber and provided at a replenishment position of the material-filled unit and a lower end coupled with a chamber case of the film formation chamber and provided at a replenishment position of the hearth liner, wherein the gate valve is disposed between the upper end and the lower end of the communication path, the combination of Kusunoki and Macionczyk teaches the above limitations.
The replenishment device 40 of Macionczyk teaches a communication path comprised of upper end 41 and lower end 43, with the gate 42 disposed between the ends that blocks or allows deposition material to flow through the path (Macionczyk, Fig. 1). Kusunoki teaches a relay chamber 210 where vacuum valve 220-1 blocks or allows material to flow through the path (Kusunoki, Fig. 9). One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify the replenishing device of Macionczyk to be relocated outside of the process chamber in the manner taught by Kusunoki as doing so would enable performing of vapor deposition for a long time without having to provide for a large capacity material supply holder within the process chamber (Kusunoki, [0077]), thereby saving costs by reducing the needed size of the process chamber (Kusunoki, [0005]). The Examiner regards the level of ordinary skill in the art as a highly educated, highly trained, highly skilled engineer with a breadth of knowledge spanning at least chemistry, physics, electronics. When performing such a modification, in order to maintain the benefits including pressure separation, the upper portion of the communication path of Macionczyk defined as the path located above the valve, would necessarily be coupled to the material supply chamber, and the lower portion of the communication path would be necessarily coupled to the process chamber.
Regarding claim 17, Macionczyk teaches a film formation device (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L342, coating apparatus 1) comprising: a film formation chamber in which at least a film formation material and a film formation target are provided (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, vacuum chamber 2 for vaporizing a vapor deposition material onto a substrate 3), wherein the film formation chamber can be set to a predetermined film formation atmosphere (Macionczyk, L355-256, chamber 2 has a pump for creating a pressure therein);
a hearth liner provided inside the film formation chamber to accommodate the film formation material (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L394-397, crucible liner 31 receives material 11, L374-375);
a heating source provided inside the film formation chamber to heat the film formation material accommodated in the hearth liner (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L367-L372, evaporation device 20 is located in chamber 2 and vaporizes material 11 in crucible 31 via electron beam 21); and
a material supply chamber having a material-filled unit that is filled with the film formation material to supply to the hearth liner (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L358-362, replenishing device 40 is located above crucible 31 and contains evaporation material 11),
wherein the film formation chamber is provided with a plurality of hearth liners, and at least two hearth liners are supplied with different types of film formation materials (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L129-134, plurality of crucibles having different materials can be provided, where plural replenishing devices 40 can be provided, L414-415).
Macionczyk fails to teach a material supply chamber separated from the film formation chamber, wherein the material supply chamber having a gate valve and configured to be set to a predetermined pressure atmosphere,
wherein after inside of the material supply chamber is set to the predetermined pressure atmosphere in a state in which the film formation chamber is set to the film formation atmosphere, the gate valve is opened to supply the film formation material filling the material-filled unit to the hearth liner via the communication path, and
wherein the communication path has an upper end coupled with a chamber case of the material supply chamber and provided at a replenishment position of the material-filled unit and a lower end coupled with a chamber case of the film formation chamber and provided at a replenishment position of the hearth liner, wherein the gate valve is disposed between the upper end and the lower end of the communication path.
However, Kusunoki teaches wherein the material supply chamber having a gate valve and can be set to a predetermined pressure atmosphere (Kusunoki, Fig. 9, [0074], relay chamber 210 is connected to process chamber 100 via vacuum valve 220-1 where relay chamber 210 is evacuated and maintained in high vacuum),
wherein after inside of the material supply chamber is set to the predetermined pressure atmosphere in a state in which the film formation chamber is set to the film formation atmosphere (Kusunoki, Fig. 9, [0074], relay chamber 210 is evacuated and maintained in high vacuum, and process chamber 100 is maintained in vacuum, [0050]), the gate valve is opened to supply the film formation material filling the material-filled unit to the hearth liner via the communication path (Kusunoki, Fig. 9, [0076]-[0080], vacuum valve 220-1 is opened and material 2 is supplied from supply device 230 to hopper 29 to evaporation source 30).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have modified the replenishing device of Macionczyk to relocate outside of the process chamber in the manner taught by Kusunoki as doing so would enable performing of vapor deposition for a long time without having to provide for a large capacity material supply holder within the process chamber (Kusunoki, [0077]), thereby saving costs by reducing the needed size of the process chamber (Kusunoki, [0005]).
While Kusunoki fails to explicitly teach wherein the communication path has an upper end coupled with a chamber case of the material supply chamber and provided at a replenishment position of the material-filled unit and a lower end coupled with a chamber case of the film formation chamber and provided at a replenishment position of the hearth liner, wherein the gate valve is disposed between the upper end and the lower end of the communication path, the combination of Kusunoki and Macionczyk teaches the above limitations.
The replenishment device 40 of Macionczyk teaches a communication path comprised of upper end 41 and lower end 43, with the gate 42 disposed between the ends that blocks or allows deposition material to flow through the path (Macionczyk, Fig. 1). Kusunoki teaches a relay chamber 210 where vacuum valve 220-1 blocks or allows material to flow through the path (Kusunoki, Fig. 9). One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify the replenishing device of Macionczyk to be relocated outside of the process chamber in the manner taught by Kusunoki as doing so would enable performing of vapor deposition for a long time without having to provide for a large capacity material supply holder within the process chamber (Kusunoki, [0077]), thereby saving costs by reducing the needed size of the process chamber (Kusunoki, [0005]). The Examiner regards the level of ordinary skill in the art as a highly educated, highly trained, highly skilled engineer with a breadth of knowledge spanning at least chemistry, physics, electronics. When performing such a modification, in order to maintain the benefits including pressure separation, the upper portion of the communication path of Macionczyk defined as the path located above the valve, would necessarily be coupled to the material supply chamber, and the lower portion of the communication path would be necessarily coupled to the process chamber.
Claims 2-3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Macionczyk (CN 108070825 A), further in view of Kusunoki (KR 20140093622 A) and Tan (WO 2019100558 A1, using previously attached English machine translation).
Regarding claim 2, Macionczyk teaches a film formation device (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L342, coating apparatus 1) comprising:
a film formation chamber in which at least a film formation material and a film formation target are provided (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, vacuum chamber 2 for vaporizing a vapor deposition material onto a substrate 3), wherein the film formation chamber can be set to a predetermined film formation atmosphere (Macionczyk, L355-256, chamber 2 has a pump for creating a pressure therein);
a hearth liner provided inside the film formation chamber to accommodate the film formation material (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L394-397, crucible liner 31 receives material 11, L374-375);
a heating source provided inside the film formation chamber to heat the film formation material accommodated in the hearth liner (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L367-L372, evaporation device 20 is located in chamber 2 and vaporizes material 11 in crucible 31 via electron beam 21); and
a material supply chamber having a material-filled unit that is filled with the film formation material to supply to the hearth liner (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L358-362, replenishing device 40 is located above crucible 31 and contains evaporation material 11), wherein the material supply chamber is connected to the film formation chamber via a communication path (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L406-423, storage container 41).
Macionczyk fails to teach a material supply chamber separated from the film formation chamber, wherein the material supply chamber having a gate valve and configured to be set to a predetermined pressure atmosphere,
wherein after inside of the material supply chamber is set to the predetermined pressure atmosphere in a state in which the film formation chamber is set to the film formation atmosphere, the gate valve is opened to supply the film formation material filling the material-filled unit to the hearth liner via the communication path,
wherein the film formation device further comprises a weight measuring instrument that measures a weight of the film formation material supplied to the hearth liner, and
wherein the communication path has an upper end coupled with a chamber case of the material supply chamber and provided at a replenishment position of the material-filled unit and a lower end coupled with a chamber case of the film formation chamber and provided at a replenishment position of the hearth liner, wherein the gate valve is disposed between the upper end and the lower end of the communication path.
However, Kusunoki teaches a material supply chamber separated from the film formation chamber, wherein the material supply chamber having a gate valve and configured to be set to a predetermined pressure atmosphere (Kusunoki, Fig. 9, [0074], relay chamber 210 is connected to process chamber 100 via vacuum valve 220-1 where relay chamber 210 is evacuated and maintained in high vacuum),
wherein after inside of the material supply chamber is set to the predetermined pressure atmosphere in a state in which the film formation chamber is set to the film formation atmosphere (Kusunoki, Fig. 9, [0074], relay chamber 210 is evacuated and maintained in high vacuum, and process chamber 100 is maintained in vacuum, [0050]), the gate valve is opened to supply the film formation material filling the material-filled unit to the hearth liner via the communication path (Kusunoki, Fig. 9, [0076]-[0030], vacuum valve 220-1 is opened and material 2 is supplied from supply device 230 to hopper 29 to evaporation source 30).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have modified the replenishing device of Macionczyk to relocate outside of the process chamber in the manner taught by Kusunoki as doing so would enable performing of vapor deposition for a long time without having to provide for a large capacity material supply holder within the process chamber (Kusunoki, [0077]), thereby saving costs by reducing the needed size of the process chamber (Kusunoki, [0005]).
While Kusunoki fails to explicitly teach wherein the communication path has an upper end coupled with a chamber case of the material supply chamber and provided at a replenishment position of the material-filled unit and a lower end coupled with a chamber case of the film formation chamber and provided at a replenishment position of the hearth liner, wherein the gate valve is disposed between the upper end and the lower end of the communication path, the combination of Kusunoki and Macionczyk teaches the above limitations.
The replenishment device 40 of Macionczyk teaches a communication path comprised of upper end 41 and lower end 43, with the gate 42 disposed between the ends that blocks or allows deposition material to flow through the path (Macionczyk, Fig. 1). Kusunoki teaches a relay chamber 210 where vacuum valve 220-1 blocks or allows material to flow through the path (Kusunoki, Fig. 9). One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify the replenishing device of Macionczyk to be relocated outside of the process chamber in the manner taught by Kusunoki as doing so would enable performing of vapor deposition for a long time without having to provide for a large capacity material supply holder within the process chamber (Kusunoki, [0077]), thereby saving costs by reducing the needed size of the process chamber (Kusunoki, [0005]). The Examiner regards the level of ordinary skill in the art as a highly educated, highly trained, highly skilled engineer with a breadth of knowledge spanning at least chemistry, physics, electronics. When performing such a modification, in order to maintain the benefits including pressure separation, the upper portion of the communication path of Macionczyk defined as the path located above the valve, would necessarily be coupled to the material supply chamber, and the lower portion of the communication path would be necessarily coupled to the process chamber.
Modified Kusunoki fails to teach wherein the film formation device further comprises a weight measuring instrument that measures a weight of the film formation material supplied to the hearth liner.
However, Tan teaches wherein the film formation device further comprises a weight measuring instrument that measures a weight of the film formation material supplied to the hearth liner (Tan, Fig. 4, L186-198, weighing device 210 transmits weight information of crucible body 201).
Tan is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of substrate processing. It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the weighing device assembly into the apparatus of modified Macionczyk as doing so would allow for measurement of the crucible/material in the crucible without manual personnel intervention of removing the crucible from the chamber (Tan, L250-257).
To clarify the record, the limitation “that measures a weight of the film formation material supplied to the hearth liner“ 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 weighing device, transmission portion, and telescopic portion of Tan are positioned in such a manner to be capable of measuring the weight of a crucible, thereby being capable of meeting the claim limitation. 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, modified Macionczyk fails to teach wherein the weight measuring instrument measures the weight of the film formation material supplied to the hearth liner in a state in which inside of the film formation chamber is set to the film formation atmosphere.
However, Tan teaches wherein the weight measuring instrument measures the weight of the film formation material supplied to the hearth liner in a state in which inside of the film formation chamber is set to the film formation atmosphere (Tan, Fig. 4, L186-198, weighing device 210 transmits weight information of crucible body 201, within the confines of the evaporation device, Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the weighing device assembly into the apparatus of modified Macionczyk as doing so would allow for measurement of the crucible/material in the crucible without manual personnel intervention of removing the crucible from the chamber (Tan, L250-257).
To clarify the record, the limitation “that measures a weight of the film formation material supplied to the hearth liner“ 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 weighing device, transmission portion, and telescopic portion of Tan are positioned in such a manner to be capable of measuring the weight of a crucible while remaining in the confines of the evaporation device, thereby being capable of meeting the claim limitation. 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 5, Macionczyk teaches wherein the film formation chamber is provided with: a first drive unit (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L399-404, positioning device 50); and
a hearth holder that is rotatable by the first drive unit and concentrically supports a plurality of hearth liners (Macionczyk, Figs. 1 and 2, L399-404, positioning device 50 rotates plate 30 that has plurality of liners 31, 32, etc arranged concentrically),
the material-filled unit filled with the film formation material is provided at a position of the material supply chamber corresponding to a position of the communication path (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L432-440, storage container 41 has second opening 62 which is located above replenishing position 34), and
the film formation device further comprises a controller that outputs a control signal to the first drive unit for controlling its rotation angle to match a position of one of the hearth liners in its revolving direction with a position of the material-filled unit in its revolving direction and a position of the communication path (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L154-159, positioning device 50 rotates crucibles between evaporating position 33 and replenishing position 34 using a controller).
Claims 4 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Macionczyk (CN 108070825 A) in view of Kusunoki (KR 20140093622 A) and Tan (WO 2019100558 A1), as applied in claims 2-3 and 5, and further in view of Ushigami (JP H1143763 A, using previously attached English machine translation).
The limitations of claims 2-3 and 5 are set forth above.
Regarding claim 4, Macionczyk teaches wherein the film formation chamber is provided with: a first drive unit (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L399-404, positioning device 50); and
a hearth holder that is rotatable by the first drive unit and concentrically supports a plurality of hearth liners (Macionczyk, Figs. 1 and 2, L399-404, positioning device 50 rotates plate 30 that has plurality of liners 31, 32, etc arranged concentrically), and
the film formation device further comprises a controller that outputs control signals to the first drive for controlling their rotation angles to match a position of one of the hearth liners in its revolving direction and a position of one of the material-filled units in its revolving direction with a position of the communication path (Macionczyk, Fig. 1, L154-159, positioning device 50 rotates crucibles between evaporating position 33 and replenishing position 34 using a controller).
However, modified Macionczyk fails to teach the material supply chamber is provided with: a second drive unit; and
a plurality of material-filled units that are revolvable by the second drive unit and are supported concentrically and each filled with the film formation, and
the film formation device further comprises a controller that outputs control signals to the second drive unit for controlling their rotation angles to match a position of one of the hearth liners in its revolving direction and a position of one of the material-filled units in its revolving direction with a position of the communication path.
However, Ushigami teaches the material supply chamber is provided with: a second drive unit (Ushigami, Figs. 1 and 2, [0030], rotary drive mechanism 63 of replenishing unit 60); and
a plurality of material-filled units that are revolvable by the second drive unit and are supported concentrically and each filled with the film formation material (Ushigami, Figs. 1 and 2, [0039]-[0041], plural evaporation materials 39 are arranged concentrically on turntable 62, and are rotated by drive mechanism 63, [0030]), and
the film formation device further comprises a controller that outputs control signals to the second drive unit for controlling their rotation angles to match a position of one of the hearth liners in its revolving direction and a position of one of the material-filled units in its revolving direction with a position of the communication path (Ushigami, Figs. 1 and 2, [0039]-[0041], rotating mechanism 63 lines up evaporation materials 39 to replenish positions in fixed table 71/turntable 72, all controlled by a control device, [0048]).
Ushigami is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of substrate processing. It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the revolving replenishment turntable/independent material cassettes as taught by Ushigami into the apparatus of modified Macionczyk as doing so would allow for the ability to have a plurality of evaporation materials pre-loaded under vacuum (Ushigami, [0008]) vs a single hopper of an evaporation material pre-loaded under vacuum (Kusunoki, [00076]-[0080).
Regarding claim 7, Macionczyk teaches wherein the hearth liner is supported by the hearth holder in a separable manner, and a rotation shaft of the first drive unit is connected to the hearth holder (Macionczyk, Figs. 1 and 2, L394-404, positioning device 50 rotates plate 30 via a drive unit about axis of rotation 5, where plate 30 that has plurality of liners 31, 32, etc arranged concentrically).
Regarding claim 8, Macionczyk fails to teach wherein the weight measuring instrument has a measurement unit and a measurement unit elevating mechanism,
the measurement unit elevating mechanism raises the hearth liner supported by the hearth holder, thereby separating the hearth liner from the hearth holder, and lowers the separated hearth liner thereby allowing the hearth liner to be supported on the hearth holder, and
the measurement unit is provided at a tip portion of the measurement unit elevating mechanism in contact with the hearth liner and measures a weight of the hearth liner in a state in which the hearth liner is separated from the hearth holder.
However, Tan teaches wherein the weight measuring instrument has a measurement unit and a measurement unit elevating mechanism (Tan, Fig. 4, L179-184, weighing device 210 and lifting device which includes contraction portion 212 and transmission portion 211),
the measurement unit elevating mechanism raises the hearth liner supported by the hearth holder, thereby separating the hearth liner from the hearth holder (Tan, Fig. 5, L240-257, power unit raises the weighing device 310 and crucible body 301 to set position, no longer contacting device 302), and lowers the separated hearth liner thereby allowing the hearth liner to be supported on the hearth holder (Tan, Fig. 5, L240-257, weighing device 310 and crucible body 301 are lowered by power unit back onto device 302), and
the measurement unit is provided at a tip portion of the measurement unit elevating mechanism in contact with the hearth liner and measures a weight of the hearth liner in a state in which the hearth liner is separated from the hearth holder (Tan, Fig. 5, L240-257, weighing device 310 supporting crucible body 301 is located at upper end of transmission portion 311).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the weighing device assembly into the apparatus of modified Macionczyk as doing so would allow for measurement of the crucible/material in the crucible without manual personnel intervention of removing the crucible from the chamber (Tan, L250-257).
To clarify the record, the limitations “the measurement unit elevating mechanism raises the hearth liner supported by the hearth holder, thereby separating the hearth liner from the hearth holder, and lowers the separated hearth liner thereby allowing the hearth liner to be supported on the hearth holder“ and “and measures a weight of the hearth liner in a state in which the hearth liner is separated from the hearth holder” 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 weighing device, transmission portion, telescopic portion, and motor of Tan are positioned in such a manner to be capable of measuring the weight of a crucible separate from a holder, thereby being capable of meeting the claim limitation. 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).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Macionczyk (CN 108070825 A) in view of Kusunoki (KR 20140093622 A), Tan (WO 2019100558 A1), and Ushigami (JP H1143763 A) as applied in claims 4 and 7-8, and further in view of Li (CN 209039572 U, using previously attached English machine translation) and Zhang (CN 108531863 A, using previously attached English machine translation).
The limitations of claims 4 and 7-8 are set forth above.
Regarding claim 6, modified Macionczyk fails to teach wherein the controller is configured to: compare the weight of the film formation material measured by the weight measuring instrument with a reference weight range that is preliminarily set;
when the weight of the film formation material is within the reference weight range as a result of the comparison, continue a film formation process;
when the weight of the film formation material is below the reference weight range as a result of the comparison, further supply the film formation material to the hearth liner; and when the weight of the film formation material is above the reference weight range as a result of the comparison, stop the film formation process and output a warning.
However, Li teaches wherein the controller is configured to: compare the weight of the film formation material measured by the weight measuring instrument with a reference weight range that is preliminarily set (Li, Fig. 1, L207-237, sensor 9 compares weight of material 2 in crucible 51 to a preset value by controller 10);
when the weight of the film formation material is within the reference weight range as a result of the comparison, continue a film formation process (Li, Fig. 1, L207-237, when sensor 9 determines weight of material 2 is above a certain preset value, vapor deposition by device 5 proceeds);
when the weight of the film formation material is below the reference weight range as a result of the comparison, further supply the film formation material to the hearth liner (Li, Fig. 1, L207-237, when sensor 9 determines weight of material 2 is below a certain preset value, material 2 is provided to crucible 51 via feeding device 8).
Li is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of substrate processing. It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the weight comparison replenishment logic as taught by Li into the apparatus of modified Macionczyk as doing so would allow for automatic control of material replenishment based on a preset value all under vacuum (Li, L207-237), thereby improving efficiency and reducing the chance of loss/waste of material (Li, L93-98).
Modified Macionczyk fails to teach when the weight of the film formation material is above the reference weight range as a result of the comparison, stop the film formation process and output a warning.
However, Zhang teaches when the weight of the film formation material is above the reference weight range as a result of the comparison, stop the film formation process and output a warning (Zhang, Fig. 3, L180-193, when the weight of crucible 20 is higher than a preset value, it is necessary to stop the production for maintenance, where the operations are controlled by control member 60, L154-158).
Zhang is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of substrate processing. It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the control logic of Zhang into the apparatus of modified Macionczyk as doing so would allow a mechanism to interrupt operation of the apparatus when the material level is out of range, potentially preventing overflow of the evaporation material from the crucible (Zhang, L180-193).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Macionczyk (CN 108070825 A) in view of Kusunoki (KR 20140093622 A), Tan (WO 2019100558 A1), and Ushigami (JP H1143763 A) as applied in claims 4 and 7-8, and further in view of Chartier (US 20160130721 A1).
The limitations of claims 4 and 7-8 are set forth above.
Regarding claim 9, modified Macionczyk fails to teach a cooler that cools the hearth liner, wherein
the cooler has a cooler unit and a cooler unit elevating mechanism,
the cooler unit includes a cooling surface provided at a tip portion of the cooler unit elevating mechanism in contact with the hearth liner, and
the cooler unit elevating mechanism raises the hearth liner supported by the hearth holder to separate the hearth liner from the hearth holder, thereby bringing the cooling surface into contact with the hearth liner, and lowers the separated hearth liner to allow the hearth liner to be supported on the hearth holder, thereby releasing contact between the cooling surface and the hearth liner.
However, Chartier teaches a cooler that cools the hearth liner (Chartier, Fig. 1, [0031], heat exchanger 36 located beneath crucible 14), wherein
the cooler has a cooler unit and a cooler unit elevating mechanism (Chartier, Fig. 1, [0031], coolant inlet tube 21, outlet tube 22, and bulb 19, where heat exchanger 20 is vertically movable in direction 20A),
the cooler unit includes a cooling surface provided at a tip portion of the cooler unit elevating mechanism in contact with the hearth liner (Chartier, Fig. 1, [0031], bulb 19 is provided at upper end of heat exchanger 20, where heat exchanger 20 is vertically movable to contact bottom of crucible 15), and
the cooler unit elevating mechanism raises the hearth liner supported by the hearth holder to separate the hearth liner from the hearth holder, thereby bringing the cooling surface into contact with the hearth liner, and lowers the separated hearth liner to allow the hearth liner to be supported on the hearth holder, thereby releasing contact between the cooling surface and the hearth liner (Chartier, Fig. 1, [0031], bulb 19 is provided at upper end of heat exchanger 20, where heat exchanger 20 is vertically movable to contact bottom of crucible 15, where heat exchanger 20 moves through a hole in crucible support 16, and crucible 15 sits on crucible support 16).
Chartier 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 incorporated the cooling apparatus as taught by Chartier into the apparatus of modified Macionczyk as doing so would allow for a cooling mechanism of the hearth liners.
To clarify the record, the limitations “the cooler unit elevating mechanism raises the hearth liner supported by the hearth holder to separate the hearth liner from the hearth holder, thereby bringing the cooling surface into contact with the hearth liner, and lowers the separated hearth liner to allow the hearth liner to be supported on the hearth holder, thereby releasing contact between the cooling surface and the hearth liner“ 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 heat exchanger of Chartier has an elevating mechanism that moves vertically through a hole in a support surface, where the cooling surface makes contact with a target surface, thereby being capable of meeting the claim limitation. 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).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Macionczyk (CN 108070825 A) in view of Kusunoki (KR 20140093622 A), Tan (WO 2019100558 A1), Ushigami (JP H1143763 A), and Chartier (US 20160130721 A1) as applied in claim 9, and further in view of Honda (US 20140050850 A1).
The limitations of claim 9 are set forth above.
Regarding claim 10, modified Macionczyk fails to teach wherein the cooler unit includes a coolant flow path provided inside the cooler unit elevating mechanism, a coolant that flows through the coolant flow path, a supply system that supplies the coolant to the coolant flow path, and a flow control valve provided in the coolant flow path,
the coolant flow path is not in contact with the hearth holder, and
the flow control valve controls a flow rate of the coolant.
However, Chartier teaches wherein the cooler unit includes a coolant flow path provided inside the cooler unit elevating mechanism, a coolant that flows through the coolant flow path, a supply system that supplies the coolant to the coolant flow path (Chartier, Fig. 1, [0031], coolant is supplied to inlet 21 and outlet 22, which are enclosed in heat exchanger 20, where exchanger 20 is movable in direction 20A),
the coolant flow path is not in contact with the hearth holder (Chartier, Fig. 1, [0031], exchanger 20 is movable in direction 20A through hole in crucible support 16, where crucible 14 and bulb 19 are in thermal contact communication).
Modified Macionczyk fails to explicitly teach a flow control valve provided in the coolant flow path, the flow control valve controls a flow rate of the coolant.
However, Honda teaches a flow control valve provided in the coolant flow path (Honda, Fig. 6 and 7, [0049], [0080], closed circuit cooling feeder 14 increases and decreases flow rate via flow rate controller 24), the flow control valve controls a flow rate of the coolant (Honda, Fig. 6 and 7, [0049], [0080], closed circuit cooling feeder 14 increases and decreases flow rate via flow rate controller 24).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the cooling apparatus as taught by Chartier into the apparatus of modified Macionczyk as doing so would allow for a cooling mechanism of the hearth liners.
Honda 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 incorporated the closed loop variable cooling circuit control as taught by Honda into the apparatus of modified Macionczyk as doing so would allow for automatic temperature control based on actual temperature input signals (Honda, [0080]).
Claims 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Macionczyk (CN 108070825 A) in view of Kusunoki (KR 20140093622 A), Tan (WO 2019100558 A1), Ushigami (JP H1143763 A), Chartier (US 20160130721 A1), and Honda (US 20140050850 A1) as applied in claim 10, and further in view of Han (US 20180290168 A1).
The limitations of claim 10 are set forth above.
Regarding claim 11, modified Macionczyk fails to teach a temperature sensor that detects a temperature of the cooling surface or a temperature sensor that detects a temperature of the hearth liner.
However, Honda teaches a temperature sensor (Honda, Figs. 6 and 7, [0080], temperature sensor 18).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the closed loop variable cooling circuit control as taught by Honda into the apparatus of modified Macionczyk as doing so would allow for automatic temperature control based on actual temperature input signals (Honda, [0080]).
Modified Macionczyk fails to teach wherein the temperature sensor detects a temperature of the cooling surface or a temperature sensor that detects a temperature of the hearth liner.
However, Han teaches wherein the temperature sensor detects a temperature of the cooling surface or a temperature sensor that detects a temperature of the hearth liner (Han, Fig. 1, [0106], sensing unit 126A may include a sensor for measuring the temperature of each crucible 122A using a non-contact or a contact method).
Han 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 incorporated the temperature sensor as taught by Han into the apparatus of modified Macionczyk would enable temperature control to be made based upon the actual temperature of the crucible contacting the deposition material (Han, [0106]), rather than the temperature of the medium after having been used to cool the crucible (Honda, [0080]).
Regarding claim 12, modified Macionczyk fails to teach wherein the controller is configured to: compare the temperature detected by the temperature sensor with a reference temperature range that is preliminarily set;
when the detected temperature is within the reference temperature range as a result of the comparison, continue a film formation process;
when the detected temperature is below the reference temperature range as a result of the comparison, reduce a cooling capacity of the cooler, and
when the detected temperature is above the reference temperature range as a result of the comparison, increase the cooling capacity of the cooler.
However, Honda teaches the controller is configured to: compare the temperature detected by the temperature sensor with a reference temperature range that is preliminarily set (Honda, [0080], temperature data from sensor 18 are input to flow rate controller 24 and compares to a threshold temperature);
when the detected temperature is below the reference temperature range as a result of the comparison, reduce a cooling capacity of the cooler (Honda, [0080], temperature data from sensor 18 are input to flow rate controller 24 and compares to a threshold temperature and when the detected temperature is lower than the threshold temperature, the flow rate of the cooling medium is reduced), and
when the detected temperature is above the reference temperature range as a result of the comparison, increase the cooling capacity of the cooler (Honda, [0080], temperature data from sensor 18 are input to flow rate controller 24 and compares to a threshold temperature and when the detected temperature is higher than the threshold temperature, the flow rate of the cooling medium is increased).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the closed loop variable cooling circuit control as taught by Honda into the apparatus of modified Macionczyk as doing so would allow for automatic temperature control based on actual temperature input signals (Honda, [0080]).
Modified Macionczyk fails to teach when the detected temperature is within the reference temperature range as a result of the comparison, continue a film formation process.
However, Han teaches when the detected temperature is within the reference temperature range as a result of the comparison, continue a film formation process (Han, [0106], when the temperature of each crucible as detected by 126A is compared to values preset in a table and below a certain range, the heating unit 123A is controlled to operate and heat the crucible).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the temperature sensor as taught by Han into the apparatus of modified Macionczyk would enable temperature control to be made based upon the actual temperature of the crucible contacting the deposition material (Han, [0106]), rather than the temperature of the medium after having been used to cool the crucible (Honda, [0080]).
Regarding claim 13, modified Macionczyk fails to teach wherein the controller is configured to: when an output power value of the heating source is increased and a temperature of the film formation material increases, the cooling capacity of the cooler is increased.
However, Honda teaches wherein the controller is configured to: when an output power value of the heating source is increased and a temperature of the film formation material increases, the cooling capacity of the cooler is increased (Honda, [0080], temperature data from sensor 18 are input to flow rate controller 24 and compares to a threshold temperature and when the detected temperature is higher than the threshold temperature, the flow rate of the cooling medium is increased).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the closed loop variable cooling circuit control as taught by Honda into the apparatus of modified Macionczyk as doing so would allow for automatic temperature control based on actual temperature input signals (Honda, [0080]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Macionczyk (CN 108070825 A) in view of Kusunoki (KR 20140093622 A), Tan (WO 2019100558 A1), and Ushigami (JP H1143763 A) as applied in claims 4 and 7-8, and further in view of Takashi (WO 2014030382 A1, using previously attached English machine translation).
The limitations of claims 4 and 7-8 are set forth above.
Regarding claim 14, modified Macionczyk fails to teach wherein the controller is configured to: compare a film thickness of a film formed on the film formation target with a reference film thickness range that is preliminarily set;
when the film thickness of the film is above the reference film thickness range as a result of the comparison, reduce an amount of the film formation material supplied from the material supply chamber, and
when the film thickness of the film is below the reference film thickness range as a result of the comparison, increase the amount of the film formation material supplied from the material supply chamber.
However, Takashi teaches wherein the controller is configured to: compare a film thickness of a film formed on the film formation target with a reference film thickness range that is preliminarily set (Takashi, Fig. 3, L537-541, control unit C compares deposited film thickness against a predetermined range);
when the film thickness of the film is above the reference film thickness range as a result of the comparison, reduce an amount of the film formation material supplied from the material supply chamber (Takashi, Fig. 3, L213-221, when the measured film thickness is larger than the allowable value, control such as decreasing the supply amount of the evaporation source), and
when the film thickness of the film is below the reference film thickness range as a result of the comparison, increase the amount of the film formation material supplied from the material supply chamber (Takashi, Fig. 3, L213-221, control unit C compares when the measured film thickness is small with respect to the allowable value in the predetermined range, it is necessary to increase the supply amount of the vapor deposition source).
Takashi is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of film deposition. It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the film thickness comparison and resulting material adjustment supply steps as taught by Takashi into the apparatus of modified Macionczyk as doing so would allow for iterative control of the deposited film thickness using actual resultant film thickness measurements (Takashi, L213-221) thereby suppressing variations in film thicknesses between processed batches (Takashi, L41-45).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Macionczyk (CN 108070825 A) in view of Kusunoki (KR 20140093622 A), Tan (WO 2019100558 A1), Ushigami (JP H1143763 A), and Chartier (US 20160130721 A1) as applied in claim 9, and further in view of Takashi (WO 2014030382 A1) and Honda (US 20140050850 A1).
The limitations of claim 9 are set forth above.
Regarding claim 15, modified Macionczyk fails to teach wherein the controller is configured to: compare a film thickness of a film formed on the film formation target with a reference film thickness range that is preliminarily set;
when the film thickness of the film is above the reference film thickness range as a result of the comparison, reduce an amount of the film formation material supplied from the material supply chamber unit and reduce a cooling capacity of the cooler, and
when the film thickness of the film is below the reference film thickness range as a result of the comparison, increase the amount of the film formation material supplied from the material supply chamber and increase the cooling capacity of the cooler unit.
However, Takashi teaches wherein the controller is configured to: compare a film thickness of a film formed on the film formation target with a reference film thickness range that is preliminarily set (Takashi, Fig. 3, L537-541, control unit C compares deposited film thickness against a predetermined range);
when the film thickness of the film is above the reference film thickness range as a result of the comparison, reduce an amount of the film formation material supplied from the material supply chamber unit (Takashi, Fig. 3, L213-221, when the measured film thickness is larger than the allowable value, control such as decreasing the supply amount of the evaporation source or changing the set temperature of the heating means), and
when the film thickness of the film is below the reference film thickness range as a result of the comparison, increase the amount of the film formation material supplied from the material supply chamber (Takashi, Fig. 3, L213-221, control unit C compares when the measured film thickness is small with respect to the allowable value in the predetermined range, it is necessary to increase the supply amount of the vapor deposition source or change the set temperature of the heating means).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the film thickness comparison and resulting material adjustment supply steps as taught by Takashi into the apparatus of modified Macionczyk as doing so would allow for iterative control of the deposited film thickness using actual resultant film thickness measurements (Takashi, L213-221) thereby suppressing variations in film thicknesses between processed batches (Takashi, L41-45).
While Takashi teaches wherein the control unit C evaluates and changes parameters such as heating temperature based on relations to the film thickness measurements in comparison to a predetermined range (Takashi, L213-221), Takashi fails to teach reducing or increasing a cooling capacity of the cooler unit.
However, Honda teaches reducing or increasing a cooling capacity of the cooler unit (Honda, [0080], temperature data from sensor 18 are input to flow rate controller 24 and compares to a threshold temperature, and the flow rate of the cooling medium is increased or decreased based upon the comparison).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the closed loop variable cooling circuit control as taught by Honda into the apparatus of modified Macionczyk as doing so would allow for automatic temperature control based on actual temperature input signals (Honda, [0080]).
Response to Arguments
In the Applicant’s response filed 04/10/2026, the Applicant asserts that none of the cited prior art, particularly Kusunoki, teach the claim limitations “wherein the communication path has an upper end coupled with a chamber case of the material supply chamber and provided at a replenishment position of the material-filled unit and a lower end coupled with a chamber case of the film formation chamber and provided at a replenishment position of the hearth liner, wherein the gate valve is disposed between the upper end and the lower end of the communication path” of independent claim 1 as newly amended. The Examiner has carefully considered the arguments but does not find them to be persuasive.
The replenishment device 40 of Macionczyk teaches a communication path comprised of upper end 41 and lower end 43, with the gate 42 disposed between the ends that blocks or allows deposition material to flow through the path (Macionczyk, Fig. 1). Kusunoki teaches a relay chamber 210 where vacuum valve 220-1 blocks or allows material to flow through the path (Kusunoki, Fig. 9). One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify the replenishing device of Macionczyk to be relocated outside of the process chamber in the manner taught by Kusunoki as doing so would enable performing of vapor deposition for a long time without having to provide for a large capacity material supply holder within the process chamber (Kusunoki, [0077]), thereby saving costs by reducing the needed size of the process chamber (Kusunoki, [0005]). The Examiner regards the level of ordinary skill in the art as a highly educated, highly trained, highly skilled engineer with a breadth of knowledge spanning at least chemistry, physics, electronics. When performing such a modification, in order to maintain the benefits including pressure separation, the upper portion of the communication path of Macionczyk defined as the path located above the valve, would necessarily be coupled to the material supply chamber, and the lower portion of the communication path defined as the path located below the valve would be necessarily coupled to the process chamber. Therefore, the combination of Kusunoki and Macionczyk are capable of meeting the claim limitations.
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
Prosecution Insights