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 with traverse of Group I (claims 1-16) in the reply filed on 08/26/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that each of the groups rely on a baffle thus will include references having a baffle assembly thus no under burden. This is not found persuasive because while the subject matter of Groups I (claims 1-16) and II (claims 17-20) may overlap, they also each require additional searches in mutually exclusive areas such that a serious burden would be placed on Examiner if examined together.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 17-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected (Group 2, method), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 08/26/2025.
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: 222. 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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “preferentially” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “preferentially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear if directing airflow to an outer edge of the lid is optional. Appropriate clarification is requested.
Claim 4 recites the limitation " angle top baffle " in the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if the “angle top baffle” is the angle top of the conical baffle, or some other structure. Examiner interprets as the former, “angle top of the conical baffle.” Appropriate clarification is requested.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 11 recites the limitation " angle top baffle " in the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if the “angle top baffle” is the angle top of the conical baffle, or some other structure. Examiner interprets as the former, “angle top of the conical baffle.” Appropriate clarification is requested.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 20220310360 to Rathi.
Claim 1: Rathi discloses a baffle assembly configured to preferentially direct air flow to an outer edge of a lid of a semiconductor processing system (para. [0051]), the baffle assembly comprising: a baffle center (nonreferenced structure between 315 and 430, Fig. 4) having a side surface and a bottom surface (Fig. 4), wherein the bottom surface is ring shaped with a central opening (central opening of that structure); a middle baffle (315 [chamber lid plate]) extending outward from the side surface of the baffle center (Fig. 4); a conical baffle (430 [gas box]) extending inward from the side surface of the baffle center (Fig. 4); and a top baffle (480 [spacer]) extending upward from the side surface of the baffle center (Fig. 4).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20220310360 to Rathi as applied to claim 1 above.
Claim 2: The apparatus of Rathi discloses wherein the top baffle (480, fig. 4 Rathi) further comprises: a lower collar (lower portion of 480 above) wherein the lower collar is ring shaped (Fig. 4) and disposed above the side surface of the baffle center (Fig. 4); and an angle sidewall (482 [inner wall]) extending from the lower collar (lower portion of 480), wherein the angle sidewall (482) extends from a centerline (center of 485) extending through a center of the central opening (center of on nonreferenced structure) and the angled sidewall (482) appears to be at a first angle from the centerline.
However Rathi does not disclose that the angle is of between about 10° and about 40°. Yet Rathi teaches that the section(s) may have different degrees of taper and may be arranged in any order or curved or the purpose of providing for more rapid radial expansion of gas flowing through the components (para. [0051]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the options of taper angles as taught by Rathi with motivation to provide for more rapid radial expansion of gas flowing through the components.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20160083837 to Narushima.
Claim 1: Narushima discloses a baffle assembly configured to preferentially direct air flow of a semiconductor processing system, the baffle assembly comprising: a baffle center (422 [cylindrical body portion], Fig. 1, 3) having a side surface and a bottom surface (Fig. 3), wherein the bottom surface is ring shaped with a central opening (Fig. 3); a middle baffle (421 [flange portion]) extending outward from the side surface of the baffle center (422); a conical baffle (41 [lid member]) extending inward from the side surface of the baffle center (422); and a top baffle (43 [ring member]) extending upward from the side surface of the baffle center (422).
However Naurshima does not explicitly disclose the preamble stating directing the airflow to an outer edge of a lid. Yet Narushima teaches the same concept of directing airflow away from a center of the chamber (para. [0067-0068]) for the purpose of restraining reaction gas to enter an interior of the bellows component (para. [0067]).
Additionally, the courts have held that where a patentee defines a structurally complete invention in the claim body and uses the preamble only to state a purpose or intended use for the invention, the preamble is not a claim limitation. MPEP 2111.02 II.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the concept as taught by Narushima with motivation to restrain reaction gas to enter an interior of the bellows component.
Claim(s) 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20220310360 to Rathi in view of US 20040065645 to Welch.
Claim 7: Rathi discloses a processing chamber for semiconductor processing, the processing chamber (400 [processing chamber], Fig. 4) comprising: a chamber body (400) comprising: a lid (“lid stack components,” para. [0037]) having a center (center of lid stack components);
a baffle assembly configured to preferentially direct air flow of a semiconductor processing system (para. [0051]), the baffle assembly comprising: a baffle center (nonreferenced structure between 315 and 430, Fig. 4) having a side surface and a bottom surface (Fig. 4), wherein the bottom surface is ring shaped with a central opening (central opening of that structure); a middle baffle (315 [chamber lid plate]) extending outward from the side surface of the baffle center (Fig. 4); a conical baffle (430 [gas box]) extending inward from the side surface of the baffle center (Fig. 4); and a top baffle (480 [spacer]) extending upward from the side surface of the baffle center (Fig. 4).
However Rathi does not disclose and a lower dome, the lid and the lower dome defining an interior volume of the processing chamber and wherein a centerline of the chamber body extends through the center of the lid and the lower dome; and a temperature control system comprising: a temperature sensor to measure a temperature of the lid; two or more blowers, directing air from the blowers to a center of the lid to an outer edge of a lid; a controller in communication with the blower and the temperature sensor.
Welch discloses a lower dome (para. [0031], Fig. 1A), the lid (104) and the lower dome (para. [0031]) defining an interior volume of the processing chamber (102 [plasma chamber]) and wherein a centerline of the chamber body extends through the center of the lid and the lower dome (Fig. 1A); and a temperature control system (114, 116, 134, 122, 170, 130/132) comprising: a temperature sensor (134 [temperature sensors]) to measure a temperature of the lid (104, para. [0034]); two or more blowers (122/130/132) directing air from the blowers to a center of the lid to an outer edge of a lid (para. [0034-0035]); a controller (170 [processor]) in communication with the blower and the temperature sensor (para. [0039]); a baffle center (124). Welch discloses this for the purpose of removing heat from the airflow from the lid to regulate the temperature (para. [0034]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the chamber structures and temperature control system components as taught by Welch with motivation to remove heat from the airflow above the lid to regulate the temperature (para. [0034]).
Claim 8: The apparatus of Rathi in view of Welch discloses wherein the baffle center (124, Fig. 1A, Welch) is disposed above a top surface of the lid (104, Fig. 1A, para. [0036]).
Claim 9: The apparatus of Rathi in view of Welch discloses wherein the top baffle (480, fig. 4 Rathi) further comprises: a lower collar (lower portion of 480 above) wherein the lower collar is ring shaped (Fig. 4) and disposed above the side surface of the baffle center (Fig. 4); and an angle sidewall (482 [inner wall]) extending from the lower collar (lower portion of 480), wherein the angle sidewall (482) extends from a centerline (center of 485) extending through a center of the central opening (center of on nonreferenced structure) and the angled sidewall (482) appears to be at a first angle from the centerline.
However the apparatus of Rathi in view of Welch does not disclose that the angle is of between about 10° and about 40°. Yet Rathi teaches that the section(s) may have different degrees of taper and may be arranged in any order or curved or the purpose of providing for more rapid radial expansion of gas flowing through the components (para. [0051]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the options of taper angles as taught by Rathi with motivation to provide for more rapid radial expansion of gas flowing through the components.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20160083837 to Narushima in view of US 20040065645 to Welch.
Claim 7: Narushima discloses a processing chamber for semiconductor processing, the processing chamber (1 [processing vessel], Fig. 1) comprising: a chamber body (1) comprising: a lid (32) having a center (center of 32); a baffle assembly configured to preferentially direct air flow of a semiconductor processing system, the baffle assembly comprising: a baffle center (422 [cylindrical body portion], Fig. 1, 3) having a side surface and a bottom surface (Fig. 3), wherein the bottom surface is ring shaped with a central opening (Fig. 3); a middle baffle (421 [flange portion]) extending outward from the side surface of the baffle center (422); a conical baffle (41 [lid member]) extending inward from the side surface of the baffle center (422); and a top baffle (43 [ring member]) extending upward from the side surface of the baffle center (422).
However Naurshima does not explicitly disclose the preamble stating directing the airflow to an outer edge of a lid. Yet Narushima teaches the same concept of directing airflow away from a center of the chamber (para. [0067-0068]) for the purpose of restraining reaction gas to enter an interior of the bellows component (para. [0067]).
Additionally, the courts have held that where a patentee defines a structurally complete invention in the claim body and uses the preamble only to state a purpose or intended use for the invention, the preamble is not a claim limitation. MPEP 2111.02 II.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the concept as taught by Narushima with motivation to restrain reaction gas to enter an interior of the bellows component.
However Rathi does not disclose and a lower dome, the lid and the lower dome defining an interior volume of the processing chamber and wherein a centerline of the chamber body extends through the center of the lid and the lower dome; and a temperature control system comprising: a temperature sensor to measure a temperature of the lid; two or more blowers, directing air from the blowers to a center of the lid to an outer edge of a lid; a controller in communication with the blower and the temperature sensor.
Welch discloses a lower dome (para. [0031], Fig. 1A), the lid (104) and the lower dome (para. [0031]) defining an interior volume of the processing chamber (102 [plasma chamber]) and wherein a centerline of the chamber body extends through the center of the lid and the lower dome (Fig. 1A); and a temperature control system (114, 116, 134, 122, 170, 130/132) comprising: a temperature sensor (134 [temperature sensors]) to measure a temperature of the lid (104, para. [0034]); two or more blowers (122/130/132) directing air from the blowers to a center of the lid to an outer edge of a lid (para. [0034-0035]); a controller (170 [processor]) in communication with the blower and the temperature sensor (para. [0039]). Welch discloses this for the purpose of removing heat from the airflow from the lid to regulate the temperature (para. [0034]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the chamber structures and temperature control system components as taught by Welch with motivation to remove heat from the airflow above the lid to regulate the temperature (para. [0034]).
Claims 17-20: (Withdrawn).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten into the independent claim including all of the limitations of the independent claim and any intervening claims. It is noted that Claim 4 is also rejected under 112 (b) due to antecedent basis issues.
Claims 10-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten into the independent claim including all of the limitations of the independent claim and any intervening claims. It is noted that Claim 11 is also rejected under 112 (b) due to antecedent basis issues.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20120269968 (Fig. 1a, 5), US 20120111271 (Fig. 3), US 20100279008 (Fig. 1, 3), US 20020039625 (Fig. 5), US 6059885 (Fig. 7), US 6039812 (Fig. 1, 3), US 4989541 (Fig. 3), all disclose using baffles and fixed means to change flow characteristics for temperature regulation at the top portion of the process chamber.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Charlee J. C. Bennett whose telephone number is (571)270-7972. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10am-6pm.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at 5712725166. 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.
/Charlee J. C. Bennett/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718