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
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “the side surfaces and the bottom surface of the faceplate and the second surface of the base portion defining a plenum” of Claim 1 and similar limitations of Claim 15, see the details in the 112 1st and 2nd rejections below, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Further, the claimed “side surfaces” must be clearly shown with an appropriate number label. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
-a. as discussed in the drawing objection and further will be discussed in the 112 rejections below, the disclosure fails to clearly disclose the claimed “side surfaces” with an appropriate number label.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
(1) Claims 1 and 15 are narrative in form. The structure which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified. The structure must be organized and correlated in such a manner as to present a complete operative device. Note the format of the claims in the patent(s) cited.
For the purpose of clarification, the claim 1 would have a better form if amended to be:
“A showerhead comprising:
a base portion made of a first metallic material, the base portion comprising:
a first surface including a gas inlet,
a second surface opposite to the first surface, and
a plurality of passages in fluid communication with the gas inlet;
a faceplate made of a second metallic material, the faceplate comprising:
side surfaces attached to the second surface of the base portion,
a bottom surface,
wherein the side surfaces and the bottom surface of the faceplate and the second surface of the base portion define a plenum in fluid communication with the plurality of passages, and
a plurality of walls extending from the bottom surface upwards through the plenum and contacting the second surface of the base portion,
wherein the bottom surface includes a plurality of outlets arranged along the walls in fluid communication with the plenum;
a heater disposed in a groove along a periphery of the base portion;
a cooling plate arranged on the first surface of the base portion, the cooling plate comprising a conduit having an inlet to receive a coolant and an outlet; and
a plate made of a third material having a lower thermal conductivity than the first and second metallic materials arranged between the cooling plate and the base portion of the showerhead”.
It is respectfully requested to amend the claim 15 in the same manner.
(2) For the purpose of consistency, the “the wall”, “the outlets” and “the passages” across the claim list should be:
“the plurality of walls”, “the plurality of outlets” and “the plurality of passages”.
(3) The “between the cooling plate and the base portion of the showerhead” of Claims 1 and 15 would have a better form if amended to be:
“between the cooling plate and the base portion”.
(4) Across all the dependent claims, it is respectfully requested to add an appropriate punctuation mark, such as:
“The showerhead of claim 1, wherein…”.
(5) In regards to the “plate” and “additional plate” across the claim list, the “plate” is a broadest term, thus for the purpose of clarification,
It is respectfully requested to amend them to be “first plate” and “second plate”.
(6) The “the cooling plate wherein the additional plate” of Claim 6 should be:
“the cooling plate, wherein the additional plate”.
(7) The “wherein the additional plate has a different thermal conductivity than the third material” of Claim 6 would have a better form if amended to be:
“wherein the additional plate has a thermal conductivity different from the third material”.
(8) The “wherein the passages extend downward from… towards and through a bottom surface” of Claims 11 and 18 would have a better form if amended to be:
The “wherein the passages extend downward from… through a bottom surface”.
(9) The “the grooves are of different lengths” of Claim 13 and “the grooves being of different lengths” of Claim 20 would have a better form if amended to be:
“the grooves have different lengths” and “the grooves having different lengths”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
(1) The “the side surfaces and the bottom surface of the faceplate and the second surface of the base portion defining a plenum” of Claim 1 and also similar terms of Claim 15 have a new matter, see the details in the 112 2nd paragraph below.
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 1-20 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 “the faceplate having side surfaces attached to the second surface of the base portion and a bottom surface, the side surfaces and the bottom surface of the faceplate and the second surface of the base portion defining a plenum in fluid communication with the plurality of passages, the faceplate including a plurality of walls extending from the bottom surface upwards through the plenum and contacting the second surface of the base portion” of Claim 1 is not clear, because of following reasons:
-a. The “side surfaces” and “a bottoms surface” are not clear, because bottom surface is a part of side surfaces.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, the claim recites the broad recitation “side surfaces”, and the claim also recites “bottom surface” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
For the purpose of examination, it will be examined inclusive of “vertical side surfaces”.
-b. The “side surfaces attached to the second surface of the base portion” is not clear.
Based on the applicants’ disclosure, the second surface of the base portion appears to indicate the “bottom surface 303, 562” of the base portion. Thus, it is not clear how the vertical side surfaces can be attached to the bottom surface of the base portion, because an ordinary skill would have considered that the “attach” of two surfaces means surface to surface contacting. Rather, the applicants’ side surface appears to extend to the bottom surface.
Emphasized again, based on the applicants’ Figs. 9-10A (showing the faceplate 404 attached to the bottom surface 562 of the base portion), the surface attached to the bottom surface is a top or upper surface of the faceplate 404.
Further, Fig. 9B shows the top or upper surface of the faceplate 404 is one surface, thus it is not clear how the claimed “side surface” is constructed such that it has a form of plural “surfaces”.
Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claimed subject matter cannot be clearly determined.
-c. also continued from the drawing and specification objection and 112 1st rejection above,
The “the side surfaces and the bottom surface of the faceplate and the second surface of the base portion defining a plenum” is not clear.
First, as discussed in the item “b” above, it is not clear how the side surface is plural surfaces.
PNG
media_image1.png
515
725
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Second, according to the applicants’ disclosures and the illustration above, the “bottom surface” appears to define a lower surface of the faceplate, which is labeled as “339”, “439”, thus it is not clear how the plenum is constructed by the bottom or lower surface 339/439 of the faceplate and plural side surfaces of the faceplate and the bottom surface of the base portion.
The metes and bounds of the claimed subject matter cannot be clearly determined.
(2) The “a plate made of a third material having a lower thermal conductivity than the first and second metallic materials arranged between the cooling plate and the base portion of the showerhead” of Claim 1 is not clear, because it is not clear which part is modified by the “arranged” phrase.
Does it mean the “first and second metallic materials are arranged between”?
It will be examined accordingly.
(3) The “a first disc-shaped element that includes a groove proximate to an outer diameter of the first disc-shaped element” of Claim 10 is not clear.
The groove of claim 10 is different from the recited “groove” of Claim 1?
If it is the same, it will be examined inclusive of:
“a first disc-shaped element, wherein the groove is provided in the first disc-shaped element so to be proximate to an outer diameter of the first disc-shaped element”.
(4) The “wherein outer diameters of the first and second disc-shaped elements and a bottom portion of the cylindrical element are equal” of Claim 10 is not clear.
The “outer diameters” of the first and second disc-shaped elements are different from the earlier recited outer diameters?
If they are the same, it will be examined inclusive of:
The “wherein the outer diameters of the first and second disc-shaped elements and an outer diameter of a bottom portion of the cylindrical element are equal”.
(5) The “the faceplate includes a plurality of grooves extending radially outwards from a center of the faceplate” of Claim 13 is not clear.
The “plurality of grooves” further limits the “groove” of claim 1 or different groove?
If it further limits the claim 1, it is respectfully requested to amend it to be:
“the groove further comprises a plurality of grooves”.
If it is different groove, it is respectfully requested to amend it to be:
“the faceplate further comprises additional plurality of grooves extending radially outwards from a center of the faceplate”, or suggest to use first groove and a plurality of second grooves.
(6) The similar terms of Claim 15 raise the same issues as the item (1) above.
(7) The “arranged between the cooling plate and the base portion of the showerhead” of Claim 15 raise the same issue as the item (2) above.
(8) Claim 17 raise the same issues as the item (4) above.
(9) Claim 18 raise the same issues as the item (5) 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