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
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 June 17, 2026 has been entered.
Election/Restrictions
Newly amended claims 1 and 12 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons: Applicant’s July 21, 2025 election of species I, Figures 1-5, without traverse. The amended claims only read on Applicant’s Figure 8, confirmed by Applicant’s page 8 June 17, 2026 statement, which is non-elected species III. To advance prosecution, the Examiner agrees to examine species III. No further shifts will be permitted.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 9-14, 17, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn (KR20210037318A1) in view of Ishikawa; Hiraku (US 20080213504 A1). Ahn teaches a substrate processing apparatus (100b; Page 25), comprising: a processing chamber (111; Page 25) including a plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings), a gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8), and a substrate processing region (PR; Page 25-Applicant’s 130; Figure 8) sequentially connected from the upper side to the lower side; a first gas supply line (122 or 124; page 25-Applicant’s 200; Figure 8) supplying a first processing gas, which is to be converted into plasma, to the plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings) to generate the plasma; a second gas supply line (134,132; page 25-Applicant’s 300; Figure 8) supplying a second processing gas (gases 134,132; page 25), which reacts with radicals of the plasma, to the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8) to generate an etchant (“Here, the second process gas G2 may be a source gas for generating an etchant (E) by reacting with the radical R in the gas mixing region (“GMR.”; machine translation); a shower head (117; Page 25-Applicant’s 500; Figure 8) disposed between the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8) and the substrate processing region (PR; Page 25-Applicant’s 130; Figure 8) and configured to deliver the etchant (“Here, the second process gas G2 may be a source gas for generating an etchant (E) by reacting with the radical R in the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8) from the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8) to the substrate processing region (PR; Page 25-Applicant’s 130; Figure 8); and an ion blocker (115a; Page 25-Applicant’s 400; Figure 8) disposed between the plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings) and the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8), wherein the ion blocker (115a; Page 25-Applicant’s 400; Figure 8) has a first blocker flow path unit (central IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 410=411+412; Figure 8) connected to the second gas supply line (134,132; page 25-Applicant’s 300; Figure 8) and closed (not claimed) to the plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings) located above the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8), and a second blocker flow path unit (edge IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 420=421+422; Figure 8; [0059]) connected to the second gas supply line (134,132; page 25-Applicant’s 300; Figure 8) and open to the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8) located below the plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings), so that the second processing gas (gases 134,132; page 25) is supplied to the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8) located below the plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings), wherein the second blocker flow path unit (edge IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 420=421+422; Figure 8; [0059]) is disposed at an edge portion of the ion blocker (115a; Page 25-Applicant’s 400; Figure 8) – claim 1. Applicant’s claimed chemical reactivity for the processing gas “which reacts with radicals of the plasma” is a claim requirement of intended use in the pending apparatus claims. Further, it has been held that claim language that simply specifies an intended use or field of use for the invention generally will not limit the scope of a claim (Walter , 618 F.2d at 769, 205 USPQ at 409; MPEP 2106). Additionally, in apparatus claims, intended use must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim (In re Casey,152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto , 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); MPEP2115). Additionally,
Additionally, because Ahn’s and Applicant’s second gases “react with radicals of the plasma”, the gases have the same properties with respect to the claimed reactivity. “Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties.” A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present (In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990) MPEP 2112.01).
Ahn further teaches:
The substrate processing apparatus (100b; Page 25) of claim 1, wherein the first blocker flow path unit (central IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 410=411+412; Figure 8) comprises, a first blocker channel (first blocker channel for IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 411; Figure 5) connected to the second gas supply line (134,132; page 25-Applicant’s 300; Figure 8) and formed inside the ion blocker (115a; Page 25-Applicant’s 400; Figure 8); and a first blocker hole (first blocker hole for IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 412; Figure 5) connected to the first blocker channel (first blocker channel for IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 411; Figure 5) and formed to be closed (not claimed) to the plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings) – claim 2
The substrate processing apparatus (100b; Page 25) of claim 2, wherein the plurality of first blocker holes (first blocker holes for IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 412; Figure 5) are disposed to be spaced apart from each other along the first blocker channel (first blocker channel for IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 411; Figure 5), as claimed by claim 3
The substrate processing apparatus (100b; Page 25) of claim 1, wherein the second blocker flow path unit (edge IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 420=421+422; Figure 8; [0059]) comprises a second blocker channel (first blocker channel for IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 411; Figure 5) connected to the second gas supply line (134,132; page 25-Applicant’s 300; Figure 8) and formed inside the ion blocker (115a; Page 25-Applicant’s 400; Figure 8); and a second blocker hole (first blocker hole for IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 412; Figure 5) connected to the second blocker channel (first blocker channel for IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 411; Figure 5) and formed to be open to the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8), as claimed by claim 5
The substrate processing apparatus (100b; Page 25) of claim 1, wherein the ion blocker (115a; Page 25-Applicant’s 400; Figure 8) has a blocker through-hole (R; page 25) connecting the plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings) and the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8) formed therein, wherein the shower head (117; Page 25-Applicant’s 500; Figure 8) has a head through-hole (H4; page 25) connecting the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8) and the substrate processing region (PR; page 25) formed therein, as claimed by claim 9
The substrate processing apparatus (100b; Page 25) of claim 1, wherein the shower head (117; Page 25-Applicant’s 500; Figure 8) has a head flow path unit (IDR1; page 25-Applicant’s 510; Figure 5) connected to the second gas supply line (134,132; page 25-Applicant’s 300; Figure 8) and open to the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8), so that the second processing gas (gases 134,132; page 25) is supplied to the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8), as claimed by claim 10
The substrate processing apparatus (100b; Page 25) of claim 10, wherein the head flow path unit (IDR1; page 25-Applicant’s 510; Figure 5) comprises a head channel (head channel for IDR1; page 25-Applicant’s 511; Figure 5) connected to the second gas supply line (134,132; page 25-Applicant’s 300; Figure 8) and formed inside the shower head (117; Page 25-Applicant’s 500; Figure 8); and a head hole (head hole for IDR1; page 25-Applicant’s 512; Figure 5) connected to the head channel (head channel for IDR1; page 25-Applicant’s 511; Figure 5) and formed to be open to the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8), as claimed by claim 11
A substrate processing apparatus (100b; Page 25), comprising: a processing chamber (111; Page 25) including a plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings), a gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8), and a substrate processing region (PR; Page 25-Applicant’s 130; Figure 8) sequentially connected from the upper side to the lower side; an ion blocker (115a; Page 25-Applicant’s 400; Figure 8) disposed between the plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings) and the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8); a shower head (117; Page 25-Applicant’s 500; Figure 8) disposed between the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8) and the substrate processing region (PR; Page 25-Applicant’s 130; Figure 8) and configured to deliver etchant (“Here, the second process gas G2 may be a source gas for generating an etchant (E) by reacting with the radical R in the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8) from the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8) to the substrate processing region (PR; Page 25-Applicant’s 130; Figure 8); a first gas supply line (122 or 124; page 25-Applicant’s 200; Figure 8) connected to the processing chamber (111; Page 25), and supplying a first processing gas, which is to be converted into plasma, to the plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings) to generate plasma; a second gas supply line (134,132; page 25-Applicant’s 300; Figure 8) connected to the ion blocker (115a; Page 25-Applicant’s 400; Figure 8), and supplying a second processing gas (gases 134,132; page 25) to the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8), which reacts with radicals of the plasma, to generate the etchant (“Here, the second process gas G2 may be a source gas for generating an etchant (E) by reacting with the radical R in the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8); and a high-frequency power supply (140; figure 25) applying a high-frequency voltage to the processing chamber (111; Page 25), wherein the ion blocker (115a; Page 25-Applicant’s 400; Figure 8) has a first blocker flow path unit (central IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 410=411+412; Figure 8) connected to the second gas supply line (134,132; page 25-Applicant’s 300; Figure 8) and closed (not claimed) to the plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings) located above the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8), and a second blocker flow path unit (edge IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 420=421+422; Figure 8; [0059]) connected to the second gas supply line (134,132; page 25-Applicant’s 300; Figure 8) and open to the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8) located below the plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings), so that the second processing gas (gases 134,132; page 25) is supplied to the mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8) located below the plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings), wherein the second blocker flow path unit (edge IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 420=421+422; Figure 8; [0059]) is disposed at an edge portion of the ion blocker (115a; Page 25-Applicant’s 400; Figure 8) – claim 12
The substrate processing apparatus (100b; Page 25) of claim 12, wherein the first blocker flow path unit (central IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 410=411+412; Figure 8) comprises a first blocker channel (first blocker channel for IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 411; Figure 5) connected to the second gas supply line (134,132; page 25-Applicant’s 300; Figure 8) and formed inside the ion blocker (115a; Page 25-Applicant’s 400; Figure 8); and a first blocker hole (first blocker hole for IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 412; Figure 5) connected to the first blocker channel (first blocker channel for IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 411; Figure 5) and formed to be closed (not claimed) to the plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings) – claim 13
The substrate processing apparatus (100b; Page 25) of claim 13, wherein the plurality of first blocker holes (first blocker holes for IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 412; Figure 5) are disposed to be spaced apart from each other along the first blocker channel (first blocker channel for IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 411; Figure 5), as claimed by claim 14
The substrate processing apparatus (100b; Page 25) of claim 12, wherein the ion blocker (115a; Page 25-Applicant’s 400; Figure 8) is divided into a first region formed in a central portion, and a second region disposed around the first region, as claimed by claim 17
The substrate processing apparatus (100b; Page 25) of claim 17, wherein the first blocker flow path unit (central IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 410=411+412; Figure 8) is formed in the first region, as claimed by claim 18
Ahn does not teach:
wherein the first blocker flow path unit (central IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 410=411+412; Figure 8) is open to the plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings), so that the second processing gas (gases 134,132; page 25) is supplied to the plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings) located above the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8) – claim 1
the first blocker hole (first blocker hole for IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 412; Figure 5) formed to be open to the plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings) – claim 2
wherein the first blocker flow path unit (central IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 410=411+412; Figure 8) is open to the plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings), so that the second processing gas (gases 134,132; page 25) is supplied to the plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings) located above the gas mixing region (GMR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8) – claim 12
a first blocker hole (first blocker hole for IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 412; Figure 5) formed to be open to the plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings) – claim 13
Ishikawa teaches a similar plasma processing chamber including a plasma generating region (R1; Figure 5) and processing region (R2; Figure 5) divided by an ion blocker (50; Figure 4,5) and showerhead (30; Figure 2,5). Ishikawa’s the ion blocker (50; Figure 4,5-Applicant’s 400; Figure 8) has a first blocker flow path unit (central 53; Figure 4,5-Applicant’s 410=411+412; Figure 3,5) connected to the second gas supply line (55; Figure 5-Applicant’s 300; Figure 8) and open to the plasma generating region (R1; Figure 5-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings), and a second blocker flow path unit (edge 53; Figure 5-Applicant’s 410=411+412; Figure 3,5) connected to the second gas supply line (55; Figure 5-Applicant’s 300; Figure 8), so that the second processing gas (54; Figure 5) is supplied to the gas mixing region (R2; Figure 5-Applicant’s 120; Figure 8) – claim 1, 12. Further, Ishikawa teaches Ishikawa’s second gas supply (55; Figure 5-Applicant’s 300; Figure 8) is supplied to Ishikawa’s plasma generating region (R1; “plasma generation region”; throughout) located above Ishikawa’s gas mixing region (R2; throughout). – claim 1, 12. Noting Ishikawa’s gas mixing region (R2; throughout) is downstream of all gas plenums where all gases are shown to mix before being exhausted.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Ahn to replace Ahn’s first blocker flow path unit (central IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 410=411+412; Figure 8) with Ishikawa’s first blocker flow path unit (central 53; Figure 4,5-Applicant’s 410=411+412; Figure 3,5).
Motivation for Ahn to replace Ahn’s first blocker flow path unit (central IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 410=411+412; Figure 8) with Ishikawa’s first blocker flow path unit (central 53; Figure 4,5-Applicant’s 410=411+412; Figure 3,5) is at least “…the concentration of the plasma excitation gas is uniform in the plasma generation region R1.” as taught by Ishikawa ([0057]) and precursor “density” or “amounts” as taught by Ahn (throughout).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 17, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant states:
“
Ahn is directed to "a substrate processing apparatus and method capable of effectively processing a substrate by controlling the type and characteristic of an etchant in a plasma process." (Ahn, Abstract.) The Office Action relies on the first IDR2 of Ahn to reject "a first blocker flow path unit connected to the second gas supply line" and the second IDR2 of Ahn to reject "a second blocker flow path unit connected to the second gas supply line and open to the gas mixing region located below the plasma generating region," as shown in FIG. 6c of Ahn, reproduced below. (Office Action, pages 3-4.) However, Ahn is silent regarding "wherein the second blocker flow path unit is disposed at an edge portion of the ion blocker," as recited in amended independent claim 1. Further, all blocker flow path units of Ahn are only open to the gas mixing region. In fact, the Office Action concedes that Ahn is silent regarding "a first blocker flow path unit ... open to the plasma generating region located above the gas mixing region," as recited in independent claim 1. (Office Action, page 9.) The Office Action instead relies on Ishikawa to reject this feature. (Office Action, page 10.)
“
In response, the Examiner’s above modified rejection addresses the invention shift to Applicant’s Figure 8.
Applicant states:
“
Ishikawa relates to "a plasma film forming apparatus for forming a film on a substrate using plasma." (Ishikawa, Abstract.) The Office Action relies on the first plasma excitation gas supply port 53 of Ishikawa to reject "a first blocker flow path unit connected to the second gas supply line and open to the plasma generating region," and the second plasma excitation gas supply port 53 of Ishikawa to reject "a second blocker flow path unit connected to the second gas supply line and open to the gas mixing region," where the plasma generating region is equated to R1 of Ishikawa and the gas mixing region is equated to R2 of Ishikawa, as shown below in FIG. 5 of Ishikawa. (Office Action, page 10.) However, as best understood by Applicant, the first plasma excitation gas supply port 53 of Ishikawa, which is connected to the gas supply line 55, is only open to R1. The second plasma excitation gas supply port 53 of Ishikawa is also only open to R1 and is closed to R2. Only the gas supply port 33 of Ishikawa, which is not connected to the gas supply line 55, but is instead connected to the gas supply line 35, is open to R2. Accordingly, Ishikawa fails to teach or suggest a first blocker flow path unit and a second blocker flow path unit both connected to a second gas supply line. Ishikawa further fails to disclose that the first blocker flow path unit and the second blocker flow path unit are respectively open to different regions of the processing chamber. Like Ahn, the first blocker flow path unit and the second blocker flow path unit of Ishikawa are all open to the same region. Therefore, Ishikawa fails to teach or suggest "a first blocker flow path unit connected to the second gas supply line and open to the plasma generating region located above the gas mixing region," "a second blocker flow path unit connected to the second gas supply line and open to the gas mixing region located below the plasma generating region," and "wherein the second blocker flow path unit is disposed at an edge portion of the ion blocker," as recited in amended independent claim 1.
“
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). Concisely, the Examiner’s grounds of rejection concerning Ahn’s first blocker flow path unit (central IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 410=411+412; Figure 8) and Ahn’s second blocker flow path unit (edge IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 420=421+422; Figure 8; [0059]) were applied as teaching the originally elected species I, Figures 1-5, where said blocker flow path units are all directed upwards towards Ahn’s plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings). The newly shifted invention, now directed to Applicant’s Figure 8, is distinguishable from the Examiner’s cited page 25 of Ahn in that none Ahn’s first blocker flow path unit (central IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 410=411+412; Figure 8) or Ahn’s second blocker flow path unit (edge IDR2; page 25-Applicant’s 420=421+422; Figure 8; [0059]) are directed towards Ahn’s plasma generating region (PGR; Page 25; machine translation-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings). However, as noted above, the Examiner’s rejection is a combination of references where Ishikawa teaches all of Ishikawa’s first blocker flow path unit (central 53; Figure 4,5-Applicant’s 410=411+412; Figure 3,5) and all of Ishikawa’s second blocker flow path unit (edge 53; Figure 5-Applicant’s 410=411+412; Figure 3,5) are directed to Ishikawa’s plasma generating region (R1; Figure 5-Applicant’s 110; see added 11/12/25 drawings). The stated grounds of motivation remain pertinent in Applicant’s prior elected invention, and Applicant’s now shifted invention.
Applicant states:
“
Separately, and independently, the Examiner's reliance on Ishikawa is additionally flawed because the Examiner fundamentally misidentifies which gas in Ishikawa corresponds to the "second processing gas" of the claims. The technical crux of the claim limitation is not merely what gas is supplied to the plasma generating region, but specifically what gas is supplied there. The "second processing gas" of the claims is expressly defined as a gas that "reacts with radicals of the plasma" to "generate an etchant." (Claim 1.) Consistent with the specification, this second processing gas is a chemically reactive species, such as NH3, that actively participates in the etchant-generation reaction. (Spec., 1 [0040], [0013].) The Examiner, in the Office Action, equates the plasma excitation gas of Ishikawa, namely, argon (Ar) supplied through gas supply line 55, with the claimed second processing gas. This equivalence cannot be sustained. Argon is a chemically inert noble gas. It does not, and cannot, react with plasma radicals to generate an etchant. In Ishikawa, Ar is used solely as a plasma excitation medium whose purpose is to sustain and excite the plasma in region R1, a function that is entirely different from the reactive, etchant-generating role of the second processing gas of the claims. The source gas of Ishikawa (e.g., C5F8 supplied through gas pipe 35), which is the functionally analogous counterpart to the claimed second processing gas, is supplied only to the source gas dissociation region (R2, the gas mixing region) and is not supplied to the plasma generating region (R1) at all. Accordingly, Ishikawa fails to teach or suggest that the second processing gas, a gas that reacts with radicals to generate an etchant, is supplied to the plasma generating region as required by amended independent claim 1.
“
In response, Applicant’s claimed chemical reactivity for the processing gas “which reacts with radicals of the plasma” is a claim requirement of intended use in the pending apparatus claims. Further, it has been held that claim language that simply specifies an intended use or field of use for the invention generally will not limit the scope of a claim (Walter , 618 F.2d at 769, 205 USPQ at 409; MPEP 2106). Additionally, in apparatus claims, intended use must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim (In re Casey,152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto , 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); MPEP2115). Additionally,
Additionally, because Ahn’s and Applicant’s second gases “react with radicals of the plasma”, the gases have the same properties with respect to the claimed reactivity. “Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties.” A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present (In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990) MPEP 2112.01).
Applicant states:
“
Further, the Office Action proposes that "[i]t would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention ... to replace [Ahnj 's ion blocker (l15a; Page 25-Applicant's 400; Figure 1-5) with Ishikawa's ion blocker (50; Figure 4,5)." (Office Action, page 10.) The Office Action asserts that motivation for this can be found in "at least '...the concentration of the plasma excitation gas is uniform in the plasma generation region R1.' as taught by Ishikawa ([0057]) and precursor 'density' or 'amounts' as taught by KR20210037318A (throughout)." (Id.) Applicant respectfully disagrees and submits that the idea for the combination came from reading Applicant's claims and specification This, however, is impermissible hindsight that fails to establish obviousness "at the time the invention was made," as required by pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). (See MPEP § 2141.01(III).) Further, even if the ion blocker of Ahn were replaced with the ion blocker of Ishikawa, the ion blocker of amended independent claim 1 could not be achieved. As noted above, Ahn discloses an ion blocker open only to the gas mixing region, while Ishikawa discloses an ion blocker open only to plasma generating region. None of Ahn or Ishikawa teaches or suggests an ion blocker having "a first blocker flow path unit connected to the second gas supply line and open to the plasma generating region located above the gas mixing region" and "a second blocker flow path unit connected to the second gas supply line and open to the gas mixing region located below the plasma generating region," nor do Ahn or Ishikawa teach or suggest "wherein the second blocker flow path unit is disposed at an edge portion of the ion blocker," as recited in amended independent claim 1.
“
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Plural showerheads dividing processing regions from plasma formation regions include at least: US 10056233 B2; US 20090320756 A1; US 9934942 B1; US 7658799 B2
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
1 March 10, 2023 IDS
Prosecution Insights