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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 April 10, 2026 has been entered.
Double Patenting
The examiner agrees with applicant’s arguments that the co-pending application 18/442679 fails to claim or fairly suggest a plurality of first and a plurality of second orifices as recited in claims 1 (alternating orifices that differ in size) and claims 11 and 20 (plurality of first and second orifices that are oriented in an alternating pattern an differ in size). Thus, the obvious double patenting rejections relative to US application 18/442679 are withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
The amendments to claims 1, 11, and 20 reciting that a plurality of first and a plurality of second orifices as recited in claims 1 (alternating orifices that differ in size) and claims 11 and 20 (plurality of first and second orifices with different size) necessitated the introduction of the prior art of Bao et al (US 2016/0362813). The prior art of Chang (US 2016/0370003) teaches a hydroxyl driven combustion reactor with alternating orifices 210 (provides hydrogen), 220 (providing oxygen) see Figs. 1, 3, 5, and 7.
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.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bao et al (US 2016/0362813) in view of Chang (US 2016/0370003).
Regarding claim 1: The prior art of Bao et al teaches a process chamber 100 used for decomposition or pyrolysis , comprising: a substrate support 112; a plurality of first orifices positioned along a first side of the chamber and oriented towards a first location of the chamber; and a plurality of second orifices positioned along the first side of the chamber and oriented towards the first location of the chamber, wherein the plurality of first orifices and the plurality of second orifices differ in size, see Figs. 1A and 5A-5C.
PNG
media_image1.png
852
694
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The prior art of Bao et al fails to teach
a) the first and second orifices are alternating orifices and wherein the plurality of first orifices and the plurality of second orifices are oriented in an alternating pattern such that each second orifice of the plurality of second orifices is at least partially surrounded by at least a first orifice of the plurality of first orifices.
b) that the process chamber is for hydroxyl driven combustion this limitation is interpreted as a matter of an intended use as the process chamber is provided with processing gases and is structurally capable of performing hydroxyl driven combustion. See the prior art of Bao et al teaches hydrogen gas and thus hydrogen radicals can be produced. The prior art of Bao et al fails to teach oxygen containing gas and thus fails to teach the production of oxygen radicals. See [0027] of Bao et al which teaches reactive species (radicals).
Note the claims do not positively recite a hydrogen containing gas source and an oxygen containing gas source. They are inferred from the preamble and the claim limitation that radicals are formed from the first and second gases. Nevertheless, the prior art of Chang teaches a burner system with a reactor where a plurality of first orifices 220/23 (providing oxygen) and the plurality of second orifices 210/22 (providing hydrogen) are oriented in an alternating pattern such that each second orifice of the plurality of second orifices is at least partially surrounded by at least a first orifice of the plurality of first orifices see Figs. 1 and 3-5. See Chang et al teaches oxidation and reduction (hybrid reactions and that oxidation or reduction only reactions can take place in the reaction) see Figures and abstract. See Chang et al also teaches in [0062] and [0063] where the sizes of the first and second orifices are different based on the length of the orifices. The motivation to provide hydrogen containing gas and oxygen containing gases is that the hydrogen and oxygen containing gases as suggested by the prior art of Chang et al ensure the desired product result and a hydroxyl driven combustion reaction. Furthermore, the motivation to orient the plurality of first orifices and the plurality of second orifices of the prior art of Bao et al in an alternating pattern as suggested by the prior art of Chang et al is that the orientation of the first plurality of first orifices and the plurality of second orifices as the design of the plurality of first orifices and the plurality of second orifices affects the gas flow path and ultimately the process result. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the prior art of Bao et al with the hydrogen containing gas to produce hydrogen radicals and to orient the orient the plurality of first orifices and the plurality of second orifices of the prior art of Bao et al in an alternating pattern as suggested by the prior art of Chang et al
PNG
media_image2.png
824
512
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
786
844
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
466
660
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The prior art of Bao et al teaches valves controlling the injected gases via valves 440-446 and flow ratio controllers 448, 450, and 452. Heating of the substrate according to [0026] of Bao et al teaches radiant sources such as lamp modules 118A, 118B. See Figs. 1 and 4B of Bao et al.
The apparatus of Bao et al fails to teach a controller (the specification of the present invention implies a single controller as controller 44 is taught in [0027] or controller 307 in [0054] of the present invention and that these controllers are a computer) configured to: heat the processing chamber; inject a first gas from the plurality of first orifices; inject a second gas from the plurality of second orifices; and produce a radical as a function of the heat, the first gas, and the second gas.
See [0085] of Chang teaches a control system that controls all operations.
The motivation to modify the apparatus and method of Bao et al with the control system (controller) of Chang to have a controller that controls the entire operations to provide an efficient manner to improve throughput. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the prior art of Bao et al with the controller of Chang.
Regarding claim 2: The chamber of claim 1, wherein the plurality of alternating orifices comprise a range of about 1 to about 15 orifices per side of the chamber. See [0039] of Bao et al which teaches 6-22 or for example 8-16.
Regarding claim 3: The chamber of claim 2, wherein the plurality of alternating orifices is about 3 to about 8 orifices per side of the chamber. See [0039] of Bao et al which teaches 6-22 or for example 8-16.
Regarding claim 4: The chamber of claim 1, wherein the first location comprises a central opening of the chamber. See Fig. 1A of Bao et al.
Regarding claim 5: The chamber of claim 1, wherein the first location comprises an edge of the substrate support. See Fig. 1A of Bao et al and substrate support 112.
Regarding claim 6: The chamber of claim 1, wherein the first location comprises half a radius of the processing chamber. See Fig. 1A of Bao et al.
Regarding claim 7: The chamber of claim 1, further comprising: the plurality of first orifices positioned along a first side of the chamber and oriented towards a second location of the chamber; and the plurality of second orifices positioned along the first side of the chamber and oriented towards the second location of the chamber. Recall the teachings of Bao et al. The prior art of Bao et al fails to teach: a) the first and second orifices are alternating orifices and wherein the plurality of first orifices and the plurality of second orifices are oriented in an alternating pattern such that each second orifice of the plurality of second orifices is at least partially surrounded by at least a first orifice of the plurality of first orifices See prior art of Chang teaches a burner system with a reactor where a plurality of first orifices 220/23 (providing oxygen) and the plurality of second orifices 210/22 (providing hydrogen) are oriented in an alternating pattern such that each second orifice of the plurality of second orifices is at least partially surrounded by at least a first orifice of the plurality of first orifices. See Figs. 1 and 3-5 of Chang et al above where the plurality of first orifices and the plurality of second orifices are located. The motivation to locate the plurality of first orifices positioned along a first side of the chamber and oriented towards a second location of the chamber; and the plurality of second orifices positioned along the first side of the chamber and oriented towards the second location of the chamber as suggested by Chang et al is that this design and orientation of the plurality of first and plurality of second orifices ensures the desired gas flow path and thus product result.
Regarding claim 8: The chamber of claim 7, wherein the second location is selected from: a central opening of the chamber, an edge of the substrate support, or half a radius of the processing chamber. See Fig. 1A of Bao et al and substrate support 112.
Regarding claim 9: The chamber of claim 1, further comprising: the plurality of first orifices positioned along a first side of the chamber and oriented towards a third location of the chamber; and the plurality of second orifices positioned along the first side of the chamber and oriented towards the third location of the chamber. Recall the teachings of Bao et al. The prior art of Bao et al fails to teach: a) the first and second orifices are alternating orifices and wherein the plurality of first orifices and the plurality of second orifices are oriented in an alternating pattern such that each second orifice of the plurality of second orifices is at least partially surrounded by at least a first orifice of the plurality of first orifices See prior art of Chang teaches a burner system with a reactor where a plurality of first orifices 220/23 (providing oxygen) and the plurality of second orifices 210/22 (providing hydrogen) are oriented in an alternating pattern such that each second orifice of the plurality of second orifices is at least partially surrounded by at least a first orifice of the plurality of first orifices. See Figs. 1 and 3-5 of Chang et al above where the plurality of first orifices and the plurality of second orifices are located. The motivation to locate the plurality of first orifices positioned along a first side of the chamber and oriented towards a third location of the chamber; and the plurality of second orifices positioned along the first side of the chamber and oriented towards the third location of the chamber as suggested by Chang et al is that this design and orientation of the plurality of first and plurality of second orifices when incorporated in the method and apparatus of Bao et al ensures the desired gas flow path and thus product result.
Regarding claim 10: The chamber of claim 9, wherein the third location is selected from: a central opening of the chamber, an edge of the substrate support, or half a radius of the processing chamber. See Figs. 1 and 3-5 of Chang et al above.
Regarding claim 11: The prior art of Bao et al teaches method using a process chamber 100 used for decomposition or pyrolysis, comprising: a substrate support 112; a plurality of first orifices positioned along a first side of the chamber and oriented towards a first location of the chamber; and a plurality of second orifices positioned along the first side of the chamber and oriented towards the first location of the chamber, wherein the plurality of first orifices and the plurality of second orifices differ in size, see Figs. 1A and 5A-5C.
The prior art of Bao et al fails to teach
a) the first and second orifices are alternating orifices and wherein the plurality of first orifices and the plurality of second orifices are oriented in an alternating pattern such that each second orifice of the plurality of second orifices is at least partially surrounded by at least a first orifice of the plurality of first orifices.
b) that the method comprises hydroxyl driven combustion see the prior art of Bao et al teaches hydrogen gas and thus hydrogen radicals can be produced. The prior art of Bao et al fails to teach oxygen containing gas and thus fails to teach the production of oxygen radicals. See [0027] of Bao et al which teaches reactive species (radicals)
The prior art of Chang teaches a burner system with a reactor where a plurality of first orifices 220/23 (providing oxygen) and the plurality of second orifices 210/22 (providing hydrogen) are oriented in an alternating pattern such that each second orifice of the plurality of second orifices is at least partially surrounded by at least a first orifice of the plurality of first orifices see Figs. 1 and 3-5. See Chang et al teaches oxidation and reduction (hybrid reactions and that oxidation or reduction only reactions can take place in the reaction) see Figures and abstract. See Chang et al also teaches in [0062] and [0063] where the sizes of the first and second orifices are different based on the length of the orifices. The motivation to provide hydrogen containing gas and oxygen containing gases is that the hydrogen and oxygen containing gases and to ensure a method of hydroxyl driven combustion as suggested by the prior art of Chang et al ensure the desired product result and a hydroxyl driven combustion reaction by using hydrogen and oxygen containing gases.. Furthermore, the motivation to orient the plurality of first orifices and the plurality of second orifices of the prior art of Bao et al in an alternating pattern as suggested by the prior art of Chang et al is that the orientation of the first plurality of first orifices and the plurality of second orifices as the design of the plurality of first orifices and the plurality of second orifices affects the gas flow path and ultimately the process result. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the prior art of Bao et al with the hydrogen containing gas to produce hydrogen radicals and to orient the orient the plurality of first orifices and the plurality of second orifices of the prior art of Bao et al in an alternating pattern as suggested by the prior art of Chang et al
The prior art of Bao et al teaches valves controlling the injected gases via valves 440-446 and flow ratio controllers 448, 550, and 552. Heating of the substrate according to [0026] of Bao et al teaches radiant sources such as lamp modules 118A, 118B.
The apparatus of Bao et al fails to teach a controller (the specification of the present invention implies a single controller as controller 44 is taught in [0027] or controller 307 in [0054] of the present invention and that these controllers are a computer) configured to: heat the processing chamber; inject a first gas from the plurality of first orifices; inject a second gas from the plurality of second orifices; and produce a radical as a function of the heat, the first gas, and the second gas.
See [0085] of Chang teaches a control system that controls all operations.
The motivation to modify the apparatus and method of Bao et al with the control system (controller) of Chang to have a controller that controls the entire operations to provide an efficient manner to improve throughput. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the prior art of Bao et al with the controller of Chang.
Regarding claim 12: The method of claim 11, wherein the first location comprises a central opening of the chamber. See Fig. 1A of Bao et al.
Regarding claim 13: The method of claim 11, wherein the first location comprises an edge of the substrate support. See Fig. 1A of Bao et al and substrate support 112.
Regarding claim 14: The method of claim 11, wherein the first location comprises half a radius of the processing chamber. See Fig. 1A of Bao et al and substrate support 112.
Claims 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bao et al (US 2016/0362813) in view of Mukai et al (US 2003/0017267) as applied to claims 1-14 and in further view of Shono et al (US 2020/0240014).
The rejection of claims 1 and 11 were recited above using the combined teachings of Bao et al and Chang et al. Note in [0029] of Bao et al it is recited that the gas outlets 136A and 136B are configured to provide individual or multiple gas flows with varied parameters such as velocity, composition, or density.
The apparatus and method resulting from the combined teachings of Bao et al and Chang fails to teach a
Regarding claim 15: The method of claim 11, wherein the first gas and the second gas are each independently injected at a volumetric flow of about 5 slm to about 40 slm.
The prior art of Shono et al teaches a process chamber 100 for hydroxyl driven combustion (see [0003], [0024], [0031], [0032], [0038] the mention of oxygen and hydrogen based gas and hydrogen and oxygen radicals) , comprising: a substrate support 138; a plurality of alternating orifices (injecting holes 151) see Fig. 1A and 1B.
See [0024] and [0025] of Shono et al wherein the volumetric flow is recited to be 1-50 slm. According to Shono et al the flow rate of the gas flow is known to affect the thickness uniformity of the layer formed on the substrate. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to further modify the apparatus and method resulting from the combined teachings of Bao et al and Chang to ensure that the volumetric flow is optimized in order to yield the desired thickness uniformity of the layer formed on the substrate as suggested by Shono et al.
The apparatus and method resulting from the combined teachings of Bao et al and Chang fails to teach:
Regarding claim 16: The method of claim 11, wherein the first gas and the second gas are each independently injected at a velocity of 1 m/s to about 20 m/s at a pressure of greater than about 50 Torr.
Regarding claim 17: The method of claim 16, wherein the first gas is injected at a velocity of 10 m/s at a pressure of greater than about 50 Torr.
Regarding claim 18: The method of claim 16, wherein the second gas is injected at a velocity of 10 m/s at a pressure of greater than about 50 Torr.
The prior art of Shono et al teaches a process chamber 100 for hydroxyl driven combustion (see [0003], [0024], [0031], [0032], [0038] the mention of oxygen and hydrogen based gas and hydrogen and oxygen radicals) , comprising: a substrate support 138; a plurality of orifices (injecting holes 151) see Fig. 1A and 1B.
See [0024] and [0025] of Shono et al wherein the volumetric flow is recited to be 1-50 slm and the pressure is 1-19 Torr such as between 5 and 15 Torr. According to Shono et al the flow rate and pressure of the gas flow are known process parameters whose optimal values can be determined without undue routine experimentation as these parameters as stated by Shono et al are known to affect the thickness uniformity of the layer formed on the substrate. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to further modify the apparatus and method resulting from the combined teachings of Bao et al and Chang to ensure that the pressure and volumetric flow are optimized in order to yield the desired thickness uniformity of the layer formed on the substrate as suggested by Shono et al.
The apparatus and method resulting from the combined teachings of Bao et al and Chang fails to teach: See Chang teaches in [0005] that oxidation reactions often occur at temperatures below 1200 °C.
Regarding claim 19: The method of claim 11, further comprising heating the processing chamber to a temperature of about 700 °C to about 1,000 °C.
The prior art of Shono et al teaches a process chamber 100 for hydroxyl driven combustion (see [0003], [0024], [0031], [0032], [0038] the mention of oxygen and hydrogen based gas and hydrogen and oxygen radicals) , comprising: a substrate support 138; a plurality of alternating orifices (injecting holes 151) see Fig. 1A and 1B. See in [0025] and [0031] of Shono et al where it is suggested that the substrate is heated about 450-1100 °C. The heating source 108 of Shono et al is controlled by controller 107. The heaters heat the substrate and the chamber to maintain the desired temperature. The temperature of the chamber is a known process parameter whose optimal values can be determined without undue routine experimentation as the temperature is known to affect the flow of gas, pressure, and the overall process result.. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to further modify the apparatus and method resulting from the combined teachings of Bao et al and Chang to ensure that the chamber temperature is optimized in order to yield the desired process result as suggested by Shono et al.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bao et al (US 2016/0362813) in view of Chang (US 2016/0370003) and Mukai et al (US 2003/0017267).
The rejection of claims 1 and 11 were recited above using the combined teachings of Bao et al and Chang et al.
The apparatus and method resulting from the combined teachings of Bao et al and Chang fails to teach a computer readable medium.
See the prior art of Mukai et al teaches a system controller 20 that controls all activities of the substrate processing system [0022] and [0023]. According to [0023] of Mukai et al the controller controls the heat via the lamp power levels, injection of the process gases including the timing. See [0023] where the system controller 20 executes system control software, which is a computer program stored in a computer readable medium such as memory 22. The motivation to provide the computer readable medium as suggested by Mukai et al in the apparatus resulting from the combined teachings of Bao et al and Chang. Thus, 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 resulting from the combined teachings of Bao et al and Chang with the computer readable medium of Mukai et al.
Claims 21 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bao et al (US 2016/0362813) in view of Mukai et al (US 2003/0017267) as applied to claims 1-14 and in further view of Rao et al (US 2019/0385874).
The prior art of Bao et al as modified by Mukai et al were discussed above.
The apparatus resulting from the combined teachings of Bao et al and Mukai et al fails to teach:
Regarding claim 21: The chamber of claim 1, wherein the plurality of second orifices is located centrally to a plurality of surrounding first orifices.
Regarding claim 22: The chamber of claim 1, wherein the plurality of first orifices and the plurality of second orifices are located on different planes
The prior art of Rao et al teaches a method and apparatus for controlling gas flow using reconfigurable gas flow plates. According to the abstract of Rao et al the parameters of the gas flow plates are adjustable/optimizable to include the number of through holes (first and second orifices), size of through holes, orientation of through holes, and the position of the through holes relative to the spacing of the substrates and see also [0026]. See also [0028] and Fig. 5 of Rao et al teaches that the orifices can be located on different places. The motivation to provide the plurality of the first and second orifices on different planes is that the locations of the first and second orifices and size of orifices are optimizable parameters that can affect the gas flow path and ultimately the product result. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the apparatus resulting from the combined teachings of Bao et al and Mukai et a by providing the he plurality of the first and second orifices on different planes as suggested by the prior art of Rao et al.
PNG
media_image5.png
415
642
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Paterson et al (US 2008/0178805) see Figs. 3B, 3C where first and second orifices surround each other and are of differing hole sizes.
Amano (US 11,574,815) see Fig. 3 where the CPU controller and readable medium are taught col. 13 line 11 – 14 line 23.
Ganguly et al (US 2011/0061810) teaches a computer readable medium (memory 216, 1557) and a controller (CPU 2130,1559), see [0143] and Figs. 14 and 21.
Yokota et al (US 2006/0223315) see Fig. 6 where hydrogen and oxygen sources performing hydroxyl combustion.
Shah et al (US 20150329966) illustrates in Figs. 4 and 5 a plurality of orifices 126, 117 with different sizes.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYLVIA MACARTHUR whose telephone number is (571)272-1438. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5 pm.
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.
/SYLVIA MACARTHUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights