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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on July 16, 2026 has been entered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: “209”. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 1, 8-11, and 13-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimada; Hironori et al. (US 20190360098 A1) in view of Hirano; Atsushi (US 20210292892 A1). Shimada teaches a substrate processing apparatus comprising:a reaction tube (12; Figure 2,3,5; [0025]-Applicant’s 100; Figure 3) having a processing space (S; Figure 2; [0025]), in which a plurality of substrates (200; Figure 2; [0027]) are accommodated to perform substrate processing; a nozzle installation part (222a-222c; Figure 3-Applicant’s 200; Figure 3,4) protruding outwardly from a side surface (12a; Figure 3) of the reaction tube (12; Figure 2,3,5; [0025]-Applicant’s 100; Figure 3) as a section of an outer surface of the reaction tube (12; Figure 2,3,5; [0025]-Applicant’s 100; Figure 3); and a plurality of gas injection nozzles (340a-340e; Figure 3; [0035]-Applicant’s 300; Figure 3,4) disposed along a circumference of each of the substrates in a direction perpendicular to the nozzle installation part (222a-222c; Figure 3-Applicant’s 200; Figure 3,4) to inject a process gas into the reaction tube (12; Figure 2,3,5; [0025]-Applicant’s 100; Figure 3); wherein the nozzle installation part (222a-222c; Figure 3-Applicant’s 200; Figure 3,4) comprises a plurality of insertion parts (18c,18d; Figure 3,4; [0058]-Applicant’s 209; 3/18/26 amended Figure 2) corresponding to the gas injection nozzles (340a-340e; Figure 3; [0035]-Applicant’s 300; Figure 3,4), in which each of the gas injection nozzles (340a-340e; Figure 3; [0035]-Applicant’s 300; Figure 3,4) is inserted and installed; wherein the nozzle installation part (222a-222c; Figure 3-Applicant’s 200; Figure 3,4) includes a body (20; Figure 1) in which the insertion parts (18c,18d; Figure 3,4; [0058]-Applicant’s 209; 3/18/26 amended Figure 2) are formed, the body (20; Figure 1) extending from an inner surface of the reaction tube (12; Figure 2,3,5; [0025]-Applicant’s 100; Figure 3) such that an inner surfaces of the body (20; Figure 1) has the same curvature (at inner 18a,18c,18d,18b; Figure 1) as the inner surface of the reaction tube (12; Figure 2,3,5; [0025]-Applicant’s 100; Figure 3); and wherein the gas injection nozzles (340a-340e; Figure 3; [0035]-Applicant’s 300; Figure 3,4) are inserted into the insertion parts (18c,18d; Figure 3,4; [0058]-Applicant’s 209; 3/18/26 amended Figure 2) disposed adjacent to the inner surface of the nozzle installation part (222a-222c; Figure 3-Applicant’s 200; Figure 3,4) to minimize a dead volume of the processing space (S; Figure 2; [0025]) - claim 1. The Examiner believes Shimada’s Figure 3 equivalents and Applicant’s corresponding structure are identical within the claimed scope. Further, with respect to Applicant’s claimed “to minimize a dead volume of the processing space”, Applicant has not provided sufficient distinguishing structural characteristics of Applicant's claimed invention to contrast the Examiner's cited prior art. When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Examer notes MPEP 2112 which states the express, implicit, and inherent disclosures of a prior art reference may be relied upon in the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. "The inherent teaching of a prior art reference, a question of fact, arises both in the context of anticipation and obviousness." In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613, 34 USPQ2d 1782, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (affirmed a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection based in part on inherent disclosure in one of the references). See also In re Grasselli, 713 F.2d 731, 739, 218 USPQ 769, 775 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
Shimada further teaches:
The substrate processing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the gas injection nozzles (340a-340e; Figure 3; [0035]-Applicant’s 300; Figure 3,4) are inserted and installed to be spaced apart from an inner wall of each of the insertion parts (18c,18d; Figure 3,4; [0058]-Applicant’s 209; 3/18/26 amended Figure 2) corresponding thereto, as claimed by claim 8
The substrate processing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the nozzle installation part (222a-222c; Figure 3-Applicant’s 200; Figure 3,4) has an inner surface that extends at the same curvature as an inner surface of the reaction tube (12; Figure 2,3,5; [0025]-Applicant’s 100; Figure 3), as claimed by claim 9
The substrate processing apparatus of claim 1, wherein a first distance (D1; Figure 4-Applicant’s D1; Figure 3) that is the shortest horizontal distance between an inner surface of the nozzle installation part (222a-222c; Figure 3-Applicant’s 200; Figure 3,4) and a center of the reaction tube (12; Figure 2,3,5; [0025]-Applicant’s 100; Figure 3) is the same as a second distance (D2; Figure 4-Applicant’s D2; Figure 3) that is the shortest distance from a position of the inner surface of the reaction tube (12; Figure 2,3,5; [0025]-Applicant’s 100; Figure 3) excluding the nozzle installation part (222a-222c; Figure 3-Applicant’s 200; Figure 3,4) to the center, as claimed by claim 10
The substrate processing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the nozzle installation part (222a-222c; Figure 3-Applicant’s 200; Figure 3,4) comprises:a pair of protrusion surfaces (protrusion surfaces for 222a, 222c; Figure 3-Applicant’s 230; Figure 4) that protrude outward (radially) from a side surface (12a; Figure 3) of the reaction tube (12; Figure 2,3,5; [0025]-Applicant’s 100; Figure 3); and an outer surface formed between the protrusion surfaces (protrusion surfaces for 222a, 222c; Figure 3-Applicant’s 230; Figure 4), as claimed by claim 11
The substrate processing apparatus of claim 11, wherein, in the nozzle installation part (222a-222c; Figure 3-Applicant’s 200; Figure 3,4), the pair of protrusion surfaces (protrusion surfaces for 222a, 222c; Figure 3-Applicant’s 230; Figure 4) and the outer surface portion (20; Figure 3-Applicant’s 240; Figure 4) are disposed on an outer surface of the nozzle installation part (222a-222c; Figure 3-Applicant’s 200; Figure 3,4), and the plurality of insertion parts (18c,18d; Figure 3,4; [0058]-Applicant’s 209; 3/18/26 amended Figure 2) are integrated with each other on the inner surface toward the processing space (S; Figure 2; [0025]), as claimed by claim 13
The substrate processing apparatus of claim 11, wherein the outer surface portion (20; Figure 3-Applicant’s 240; Figure 4) has the same curvature as an outer surface of the reaction tube (12; Figure 2,3,5; [0025]-Applicant’s 100; Figure 3), as claimed by claim 14
The substrate processing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the reaction tube (12; Figure 2,3,5; [0025]-Applicant’s 100; Figure 3) comprises an exhaust port (236; Figure 5) at a position facing the nozzle installation part (222a-222c; Figure 3-Applicant’s 200; Figure 3,4), as claimed by claim 15
The substrate processing apparatus of claim 15, wherein the reaction tube (12; Figure 2,3,5; [0025]-Applicant’s 100; Figure 3) is disposed to be line symmetric (Figure 4) with respect to a virtual horizontal line connecting a center of the exhaust port (236; Figure 5) to a center of the nozzle installation part (222a-222c; Figure 3-Applicant’s 200; Figure 3,4) on a plane, as claimed by claim 16
The substrate processing apparatus of claim 1, wherein each of the gas injection nozzles (340a-340e; Figure 3; [0035]-Applicant’s 300; Figure 3,4) includes a plurality of gas injection holes (234a; Figure 5) formed in the vertical direction, and the gas injection nozzles (340a-340e; Figure 3; [0035]-Applicant’s 300; Figure 3,4) are disposed to inject the process gas such that the plurality of gas injection holes (234a; Figure 5) inject the process gas in parallel (see gas flow lines of Figure 1), as claimed by claim 17.
The substrate processing apparatus of claim 1, further comprising an outer tube (14; Figure 2,3) into which the reaction tube (12; Figure 2,3,5; [0025]-Applicant’s 100; Figure 3) is disposed and an exhaust space between the outer tube (14; Figure 2,3) and the reaction tube (12; Figure 2,3,5; [0025]-Applicant’s 100; Figure 3), as claimed by claim 18
The substrate processing apparatus of claim 18, wherein a side surface (14a; Figure 3) of the outer tube (14; Figure 2,3), an inner surface of the nozzle installation part (222a-222c; Figure 3-Applicant’s 200; Figure 3,4), and a side surface (12a; Figure 3) of the reaction tube (12; Figure 2,3,5; [0025]-Applicant’s 100; Figure 3) have the same curvature as each other, as claimed by claim 19
Shimada does not teach Applicant’s amended claim 1 limitation of insertion grooves (Applicant’s 210; Figure 3,4). As a result, Shimada does not teach wherein Shimada’s insertion parts (18c,18d; Figure 3,4; [0058]-Applicant’s 209; 3/18/26 amended Figure 2) include a plurality of insertion grooves (Applicant’s 210; Figure 3,4), each having a shape corresponding to an outer surface of a corresponding gas injection nozzle (340a-340e; Figure 3; [0035]-Applicant’s 300; Figure 3,4), such that Shimada’s corresponding gas injection nozzle (340a-340e; Figure 3; [0035]-Applicant’s 300; Figure 3,4) is inserted and installed; and wherein Shimada’s gas injection nozzles (340a-340e; Figure 3; [0035]-Applicant’s 300; Figure 3,4) are inserted into the insertion grooves (Applicant’s 210; Figure 3,4) in a direction parallel to Shimada’s inner surface of Shimada’s reaction tube (12; Figure 2,3,5; [0025]-Applicant’s 100; Figure 3) – claim 1.
Hirano was discussed in the prior action and also teaches insertion parts (12b; Figure 2-Applicant’s 209; 3/18/26 amended Figure 2) comprise a plurality of insertion grooves (12b; Figure 2-Applicant’s 210; Figure 3,4), each of which has a shape corresponding to an outer surface of Hirano’s gas injection nozzle (340d,e; Figure 2) in an inner wall toward Hirano’s processing space (12; Figure 2) so that Hirano’s gas injection nozzle (340d,e; Figure 2) is inserted and installed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Shimada to optimize Shimada’s insertion groove dimensions as taught by Hirano.
Motivation for Shimada to optimize Shimada’s insertion groove dimensions as taught by Hirano is to “..uniformize an injection amount of the gas..” ([0065], [0073]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 16, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant states:
“
The Final Office Action alleges that reference numeral "209" is found in the drawings but is not in the specification. The Final Office Action did not indicate a drawing in which "209" is found. The Applicant was unable to find "209" in any of the drawings. The Applicant found "290" in the drawings, and "290" is found, for example, in paragraphs [0017], [00101], and [00103] of the specification as originally filed. Thus, the drawings comply with 37 C.F.R. §1.84(p)(5). Withdrawal of the objection under 35 U.S.C. $1.84(p)(5) is respectfully requested If the Examiner intends to maintain this objection, the Applicant respectfully requests an identification of a drawing and location of reference numeral "209" in the drawing.
“
In response, Applicant’s Figure 2 replacement sheet of March 18, 2026 adds reference number “209” but no corresponding amendment is made to the specification. The objection is maintained.
Applicant states:
“
Shimada and Hirano fail to teach or suggest "the nozzle installation part includes a body in which the insertion parts are formed, the body extending from an inner surface of the reaction tube such that an inner surface of the body has the same curvature as the inner surface of the reaction tube;" "the insertion parts include a plurality of insertion grooves, each having a shape corresponding to an outer surface of a corresponding gas injection nozzle, such that the corresponding gas injection nozzle is inserted and installed;" and "the gas injection nozzles are inserted into the insertion grooves in a direction parallel to the inner surface of the reaction tube" as set forth in claim 1 as amended.
“
And …
“
Hirano discloses a configuration in which gas nozzles 340d, 340e are shown in Figure 2 Hirano does not involve a structure in which the gas nozzles are inserted into an insertion groove in a direction parallel to the inner surface of the reaction tube because the gas nozzles protrude toward the substrates relative to the inner surface.
“
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Notably, the directionality argued by Applicant is identically shown in Shimada’s Figure 1 when compared to Applicant’s Figure 3. The Examiner’s combination states it would … for Shimada to optimize Shimada’s insertion groove dimensions as taught by Hirano. Motivation for Shimada to optimize Shimada’s insertion groove dimensions as taught by Hirano is to “..uniformize an injection amount of the gas..” ([0065], [0073]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Reactors with vertically stacked substrates using nozzle plenums with similar geometry include US 20200098555 A1; US 20190112710 A1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Rudy Zervigon whose telephone number is (571) 272- 1442. The examiner can normally be reached on a Monday through Thursday schedule from 8am through 6pm EST. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Any Inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the Chemical and Materials Engineering art unit receptionist at (571) 272-1700. If the examiner cannot be reached please contact the examiner's supervisor, Parviz Hassanzadeh, at (571) 272- 1435.
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:/Awww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
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.
/Rudy Zervigon/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights