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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
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) 1-3, 5, and 7-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikeda et al., U.S. Patent 9,204,500 (hereinafter “Ikeda”) in view of Wang, Chinese Patent Publication CN 110028697A (hereinafter “Wang”).
In Reference to Claim 1:
Ikeda discloses a microwave heating device, comprising: a chamber (2) configured to accommodate at least one target (W); and a plurality of microwave sources (10) disposed at a top (See, Figure 1) of the chamber (2) to emit a microwave to the at least one target (W) , wherein an included angle between a direction of microwave electric field of a portion in the plurality of microwave sources (10) and a direction of microwave electric field of another portion in the plurality of microwave sources is between 80 degrees and 100 degrees (See, Figure 3: 90 degrees; See, also Col. 2 lines 29-34 and Col. 10, lines 59-65.)
Ikeda fails to disclose the newly amended limitation of wherein the microwaves emitted by at least two of the plurality of microwave sources interfere with each other, and waveform bandwidths of the microwaves emitted by at least two of the plurality of microwave sources are overlapped and coupled inside the chamber to generate coupling modes.
However, in the same field of endeavor, microwave heating apparatus, Wang discloses wherein a plurality of microwaves sources are placed in an orientation wherein the source interfer with each other and waveform bandwiths of the microwaves emitted from the sources are overlapped and coupled inside the chamber. See, Figure 8 which shows microwave source 11 and 13 being placed in the same plane and different orientations, such that the their wave overlaps and couples.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify Ikeada with the teachings of Wang, specifically to modify orientation of the microwave sources and the controller of Ikeda such that the microwaves omitted from the different sources are capable of being coupled as taught by Wang because such a modification would improve heating and efficiency by providing a more uniform microwave signal (as discussed in Wang).
In Reference to Claim 2:
Ikeda and Wang both further discloses wherein an included angle between a direction of microwave electric field of a portion in the plurality of microwave sources and a direction of microwave electric field of another portion in the plurality of microwave sources is between 85 degrees and 95 degrees. See, Figure 3: 90 degrees; See, also Col. 2 lines 29-34 and Col. 10, lines 59-65.) See, Wang Figure 8.
In Reference to Claim 3:
Ikeda and Wang both further discloses wherein an included angle between a direction of microwave electric field of a portion in the plurality of microwave sources and a direction of microwave electric field of another portion in the plurality of microwave sources is 90 degrees. See, Figure 3: 90 degrees; See, also Col. 2 lines 29-34 and Col. 10, lines 59-65.) See, Wang Figure 8.
In Reference to Claim 5:
Ikeda further discloses wherein a direction of microwave electric field of the plurality of microwave sources is parallel to the carrying surface, and a direction of microwave propagation of the plurality of microwave sources is perpendicular to the carrying surface. See, Figure 7a and 7B and the orientation 9 showing that the first and second sources are 90 degrees offset.
In Reference to Claim 7:
Ikeda further discloses a plurality of supports (14) disposed in the chamber (2) and extended from a bottom of the chamber to the top and configured to carry the at least one target (W).
In Reference to Claim 8:
Ikeda further discloses wherein an extending direction of the plurality of supports (14) is perpendicular to a direction of microwave electric field (Shown in Figure 3) of the plurality of microwave sources (10), and the extending direction of the plurality of supports is parallel to a direction of microwave propagation of the plurality of microwave sources. See, Figure 3 showing the electric field and Figure 7 showing the microwave propagation which is parallel to the supports (14).
In Reference to Claim 9:
Ikeda further discloses wherein the plurality of microwave sources (10) emit a microwave sequentially or randomly, and within a time interval, at least two of the microwave sources emit microwaves coupled to each other. See, Col. 13 lines 37-43 which disclose sequential emission of the microwaves from the sources.
In Reference to Claim 10:
Ikeda further discloses wherein the plurality of microwave sources have a plurality of first microwave input ports and a plurality of second microwave input ports, and the plurality of first microwave input ports are perpendicular to the plurality of
Ikeda discloses all the limitation to claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of microwave sources comprise a plurality of first waveguide tubes and a plurality of second waveguide tubes, and a portion in the plurality of first waveguide tubes surrounds the plurality of second waveguide tubes.
However in the same field of endeavor, a microwave heating apparatus, Wang discloses a heating apparatus which features a plurality first(11) and second guide tubes (13) and wherein first and second guide tubes have been defined based of the sequence in which the microwave is emitted (See, Figure 8 which shows how the waves is altered by the orientation of said guide tube and wherein the first wave guide tube surrounds a plurality of second wave guide tubes. See, Figure 12 which illustrates the first guide tube and second guide tube are patterned circumferentially. Therefore in the upper row of the heating chamber circumference the first guide tube 11 would be surrounded along the circumference by a second wave guide tube on each side, and likewise in the lower row, the second wave guide tube 13 would be surrounded circumferentially by the first guide tubes.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify Ikeda, with the teachings of Wang, specifically to have a plurality of microwave emitters (11 and 13) oriented in a different orientation in the vertical direction and patterned around the circumference (See, Wang Figure 12) instead of the emitters being from the top and having different orientations (as found in Ikeda) different because as shown by Wang in Figure 8 such a configuration produces a more uniform magnetic field due to said orientation and therefore given the patterned placement would produce a more uniform heating within the chamber than that of Ikeda.
second microwave input ports. See, Figure 3 which shows the for input ports (10A-10D) are arranged 90 degrees from each other.
In Reference to Claim 13:
Ikeda further discloses wherein the plurality of microwave sources comprise a plurality of fixed-frequency microwave sources or a plurality of variable-frequency microwave sources. See, Col. 7 lines 59-62.
Claim(s) 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikeda et al., U.S. Patent 9,204,500 (hereinafter “Ikeda”) in view of Wang, Chinese Patent Publication CN 110028697A (hereinafter “Wang”), in further view of Yamamoto, U.S. Patent Publication 2014/0117009 (hereinafter “Yamammoto”).
In Reference to Claim 4:
Ikeda as modified discloses all the limitations set forth in claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose a carrier rotatably and liftably disposed in the chamber and having a carrying surface configured to carry the at least one target.
However, in the same field of endeavor, microwave heating apparatus, Yamamoto discloses a microwave heating apparatus that is in nearly the identical configuration of Ikeda, however features a carrying surface (15) which is attached to a driving unit (17) by a support shaft (14) wherein the driving unit is responsible for rotating the carrying surface to rotate and hold the target (W). Yamamotos rotatable support suface allows for uniform heating in the surface of the wafer W. As a result, the uniformity of the annealing process in the circumferential direction in the surface of the wafer W can be realized by the rotation.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify Ikeda, with the teachings of Yamamoto, specifically modifying the support carrier of Ikeda such that it features a rotatable carrying surface which is attached to a driving unit (17) by a support shaft because as discussed in Yamamoto such modification allows for a better annealing process by producing a more uniform heating in the circumferential direction of the target by the realized rotation.
In Reference to Claim 6:
Ikeda as modified further discloses wherein in a direction perpendicular to the carrying surface, a projection of at least a portion in the plurality of microwave sources falls on the carrying surface. See, Ikeda Figure 3 and Yamaoto figures which both shows that a portion of the plurality of microwave sources falls on the carrying surface.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. CA 1300691 discloses the concept of coupling multiple wave sources that are at a different orientation for the purpose of improved heating uniformity.
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.
/DANIEL S COLLINS/ Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/NATHANIEL E WIEHE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights