DETAILED ACTION
The Applicant’s amendment filed on June 30, 2026 was received. Claims 1 and 11 were amended.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action issued March 31, 2026.
Claim Interpretation
The term “Spectrometer” recited in claim 1 is understood as any device that detects light for the purposes of compact prosecution.
The term “wireless transceiver” recited in claim 10 is understood as any device that receives wireless communication.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lin on claims 11-14 are withdrawn because independent claim 11 has been amended.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. in view of Cafferty et al., on claims 1-2, 4, 8 and 10 are withdrawn because independent claim 1 has been amended.
The claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al., Cafferty et al. and Frick et al., on claims 5-6 and 9 are withdrawn because independent claim 1 has been amended.
The claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al., Cafferty et al. and Zhang et al. on claim 3 is withdrawn because independent claim 1 has been amended.
The claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al., Cafferty et al. and Jang et al. on claim 3 is withdrawn because independent claim 1 has been amended.
The claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. and Zhang et al. on claim 15 is withdrawn because independent claim 11 has been amended.
Please consider the following.
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-9 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh (US 2023/0377857) in view of Frick (US 2005/0052648).
In regards to claim 1, Oh teaches a plasma processing apparatus comprising:
a housing (110, chamber) (fig. 2, 5-12, 14-15; para. 34, 37-39);
a diagnostic device on a wall of the housing, the diagnostic device comprising:
an optical source unit-200, an optical source unit-300, and a spectrometer/spectroscope (400) (fig. 2, 5-12, 14-15; para. 34, 53-58);
where the optical source unit-200 and spectrometer detects reflected light from a reflector (125),
the reflector is within the housing and part of an interior surface of the housing, where the spectrometer/spectroscope provides density of active species gas within the housing (fig. 2, 5-12, 14-15; para. 47-51, 58).
Oh does not explicitly teach the diagnostic device comprises a board, the spectrometer on the board and a housing around the board.
However, Frick teaches a spectral photometer comprising a housing (1) which contains the components of the spectral photometer. Frick teaches a spectrometer arrangement (30) comprising a photoelectric receiver (38, part of spectrometer) on a printed circuit board (33, board), where the photoelectric receiver communicates with an electronic circuit (100) (fig. 1, 5; para. 22, 38-39).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the spectral photometer of Frick onto the diagnostic device of Oh because Frick teaches it will improve the reliability of the device along with serviceability (para. 8).
In regards to claim 2, Oh and Frick as discussed, where Oh teaches the diagnostic device comprising the optical source unit-200 is provided on (integrated) a wall of the housing (fig. 2, 5-12, 14-15).
In regards to claim 4, Oh and Frick as discussed, where Oh teaches multiple diagnostic devices are provided on the housing (fig. 7; para. 84-88).
In regards to claim 5, Oh and Frick as discussed, where Frick teaches an illumination arrangement (10, light source) is provided on a printed circuit board (15) (fig. 1, 5; para. 23, 25-26).
In regards to claim 6, Oh and Frick as discussed, where Frick teaches illumination arrangement comprises a plurality of light emitting diodes (11a-11d) and optically coupled to the photoelectric receiver (para. 27).
In regards to claim 8, Oh and Frick as discussed, where Oh teaches the diagnostic device comprising the optical source unit-200 abuts a viewing window (120) that is optically clear (fig. 2-3; para. 46-47, 54).
In regards to claim 9, Oh and Frick as discussed, where Frick teaches the electronic circuit (100) comprises power supplies (internal power source ) (fig. 8; para. 48-49).
In regards to claim 11, Oh teaches a plasma processing apparatus comprising:
a housing (110, chamber) (fig. 2, 5-12, 14-15; para. 34, 37-39);
a diagnostic device on a wall of the housing, the diagnostic device comprising:
an optical source unit-200, an optical source unit-300, and a spectrometer/spectroscope (400) (fig. 2, 5-12, 14-15; para. 34, 53-58);
where the optical source unit-200 and spectrometer detects reflected light from a reflector (125),
the reflector is within the housing and part of an interior surface of the housing, where the spectrometer/spectroscope provides density of active species gas within the housing (fig. 2, 5-12, 14-15; para. 47-51, 58).
Oh teaches multiple diagnostic devices are provided on the housing (fig. 7; para. 84-88).
Oh does not explicitly teach the diagnostic device comprises a board, the spectrometer on the board and a housing around the board.
However, Frick teaches a spectral photometer comprising a housing (1) which contains the components of the spectral photometer. Frick teaches a spectrometer arrangement (30) comprising a photoelectric receiver (38, part of spectrometer) on a printed circuit board (33, board), where the photoelectric receiver communicates with an electronic circuit (100) (fig. 1, 5; para. 22, 38-39).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the spectral photometer of Frick onto the diagnostic device of Oh because Frick teaches it will improve the reliability of the device along with serviceability (para. 8).
In regards to claim 12, Oh and Frick as discussed, where Oh teaches the multiple diagnostic devices will provide improved accuracy in the measurements (para. 88).
In regards to claim 13, Oh and Frick as discussed, where Oh teaches the multiple diagnostic devices comprises a plurality of spectrometer/spectroscope (fig. 7; para. 84-88).
In regards to claim 14, Oh and Frick as discussed, where Oh teaches the multiple diagnostic devices comprises a plurality of lamps (light sources) (fig. 7; para. 84-85).
Claims 3 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh and Frick as applied to claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-9 and 11-14 above, and further in view of Zhang (WO2022132704, corresponding US 2024/0096713, cited below).
In regards to claims 3 and 15, Oh and Frick as discussed but do not explicitly teach the diagnostic device is integrated into a gas line into or out of the chamber.
However, Zhang teaches a spectral reflectometer (200) comprises a collimator housing (184) that is connected to a gas inlet (182) (fig. 1; para. 67-68, 70, 73).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the spectral reflectometer connected to the gas inlet of Zhang onto the gas inlet of the housing of Oh and Frick because Zhang teaches it will provide control and adjustment to the process conditions (para. 15).
Claims 7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh and Frick as applied to claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-9 and 11-14 above, and further in view of Jang (US 2019/0204220).
In regards to claim 7, Oh and Frick as discussed but do not explicitly teach a plurality of spectrometers on the board.
However, Jang teaches an optical sensor (300 comprises a plurality of light sources (311- 315) and a plurality of second photodetectors (330, 341-345, plurality of spectrometers) on a substrate (350) (fig. 3-6; para. 68-76) .
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the optical sensor of Jang onto the diagnostic device of Oh and Frick because Jang teaches it will aid in the checking the light sources (para. 19).
In regards to claim 10, Oh and Frick as discussed but do not explicitly teach the diagnostic device comprises a wireless transceiver.
However, Jang teaches the optical sensor is connected to a processor (220) and to a communicator (730, wireless transceiver). Jang teaches the communicator communicates with an external device by using Bluetooth communication, Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) communication, Near Field Communication (NFC), WLAN communication, Zigbee communication, Infrared Data Association (IrDA) communication, Wi-Fi Direct (WFD) communication, Ultra-Wideband (UWB) communication, Ant+ communication, WIFI communication, Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) communication, 3G communication, 4G communication, 5G communication, and the like (fig. 7; para. 96).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the communicator of Jang onto the apparatus of Oh and Frick because wireless communication represents a well-known element for transferring of data.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see response filed June 30, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of the claims have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Oh and Frick.
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 Binu Thomas whose telephone number is (571)270-7684. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday, 8:00AM-5:00PM 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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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.
/Binu Thomas/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1717
Prosecution Insights