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 without traverse of Species II-Figure 3 in the reply filed on January 12, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 3-4, 7-8, 11-12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: an impedance adjusting device in claims 1-2, 5-6, and 9-10.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Page 5, line 20-page 6, line 5, the specification indicates that the impedance adjusting device may have a first capacitor, a second capacitor, and an inductor. At least one of a first capacitance of the first capacitor, a second capacitance of the second capacitor, and an inductance of the inductor may be variable and may be controlled by the controller. The first capacitor and the inductor may be electrically connected in series. The first capacitor may be electrically connected to the lower electrode. The inductor may be electrically connected to the lower electrode via the first capacitor. The second capacitor and the inductor may be electrically connected in parallel to the lower electrode via the first capacitor.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (U.S. 2013/0134877).
Referring to Figures 1-2 and paragraphs [0024]-[0040], Kim et al. disclose a plasma processing apparatus comprising: a chamber 260 (par.[0028]); a lower electrode 250 provided in the chamber and included in a substrate support configured to place a substrate thereon (par.[0030]); an upper electrode 240 provided in the chamber and disposed to face the lower electrode (par.[0029]); a gas supply (i.e. gas distribution means) configured to supply a processing gas between the upper electrode and the lower electrode (par.[0029]); a high-frequency power supply 210 electrically connected to the upper electrode and configured to generate a plasma of the processing gas by applying a high-frequency voltage to the upper electrode (par.[0025]); a first meter 272 configured to measure a potential waveform of the upper electrode (par.[0031]); a second meter 274 configured to measure a potential waveform of the lower electrode (par.[0031]); a detector 270 configured to detect a voltage waveform (pars.[0032],[0036],i.e. calculating voltage); an impedance adjusting device 230 configured to adjust an impedance of the lower electrode (pars.[0026], [0034]-[0035]); and a controller 270 configured to control the impedance adjusting device to adjust the impedance of the lower electrode based on the voltage waveform detected by the detector (pars.[0031]-[0032]).
Kim et al. is silent on a detector configured to detect a voltage waveform obtained by subtracting a second potential waveform measured by the second meter from a first potential waveform measured by the first meter; however, Kim et al. teach that the controller operates to calculate voltage waveform based on the voltages provided by the meters 272, 274 (pars.[0032], [0036]). Calculations for a controller include adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing. Hence, the controller 270 includes a detector and operates to detect a voltage waveform obtained by subtracting a second potential waveform measured by the second meter from a first potential waveform measured by the first meter. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the apparatus of Kim et al. to include a detector configured to detect a voltage waveform obtained by subtracting a second potential waveform measured by the second meter from a first potential waveform measured by the first meter in order to control the power distribution between the electrodes.
With respect to claim 2. the plasma processing apparatus of Kim et al. further includes wherein the controller 270 controls the impedance adjusting device 230 to adjust the impedance of the lower electrode so as to reduce a peak value on a positive potential side of the voltage waveform (pars.[0031]-[0032], [0052]-[0054]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6, 9-10, and 13-14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The closest prior art, Kim et al., discloses a chamber; a lower electrode; an upper electrode; a gas supply; a high-frequency power supply; a first meter; a second meter; a detector; an impedance adjusting device; and a controller. However, Kim et al. fail to teach nor is there motivation for wherein the impedance adjusting device has a first capacitor, a second capacitor, and an inductor, at least one of a first capacitance of the first capacitor, a second capacitance of the second capacitor, and an inductance of the inductor is variable and controlled by the controller, the first capacitor and the inductor are electrically connected in series, the first capacitor is electrically connected to the lower electrode, the inductor is electrically connected to the lower electrode via the first capacitor, and the second capacitor and the inductor are electrically connected in parallel to the lower electrode via the first capacitor.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Tomita et al.’100, Barnes et al.’881, Bera et al.’089, Woo et al.’039, Maebashi’450, Rocha-Alvarez et al.’489, Sato’966, and Miyama’199 teach an impedance adjusting device. Shindo et al.’217 teach first and second meters. Okabe et al.’374 teach first and second meters, an impedance adjusting device, and a controller. Satoyoshi et al.’769 teach a plurality of impedance adjusting devices connected to the lower electrode.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michelle CROWELL whose telephone number is (571)272-1432. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10:00am-6:00pm.
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, Parviz Hassanzadeh can be reached at 571-272-1435. 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.
/Michelle CROWELL/Examiner, Art Unit 1716
/RAM N KACKAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights