DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on (6/7/2023), is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims (1-20) were pending. In response to an election requirement the applicant elected claims 1-16 dated 12/09/2025. The election was without traverse. Claims 17-20 were withdrawn from consideration. Therefore claims 1-16 were examined in a Non-Final office action on 3/25/2026.
This office action is in response to Applicants submission of 6/30/2026. Some claims were amended.
Drawings
Corrected drawing of Fig 3 is noted.
Claim Interpretation
The limitation “A structure embodied in a machine-readable medium used in a design process, the structure comprising: a unitary gas distribution nozzle assembly” is not fully understood. From the specification, it appears that the claimed invention is about digital information generated to make a chamber component using additive manufacturing.
Claims 8, 11, 15 and 16 are directed to sensors associated with temperature control of the gas distribution nozzle and could be to detect and control temperature of the nozzle and flow rate or temperature of the heat transfer fluid. As discussed above, their disposition is unclear.
However, as these were well known in the art, they are interpreted as generic sensors disposed appropriately to measure temperature and flow rate.
Response to Amendment and arguments
Applicant’s argument that the combination teaches away from Zhou is not persuasive since the rejection proposed modifying Hazarika by the teaching of Zhou and Barns. There would be no need to impose the whole body-structure of Zhou in to Hazarika. More over omission of an element with a corresponding omission of function is within the level of ordinary skill. In re Wilson 153 USPQ 740 (CCPA 1967). The rejection is maintained.
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 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.
Claims 1-7, 9-10 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hazarika et al (US 20240062997) in view of Zhou et al (US 8440049) and Barns et al (US 6818096).
Hazarika et al disclose a structure embodied in a machine-readable medium used in a design process, the structure could be a component of a semiconductor processing chamber made by additive manufacturing process (Abstract and Fig 1). The controller for such manufacturing disclosed in Fig 11 includes machine readable medium (1102-1104, 1106 and 116) and actuator to control an additive manufacturing system disclosed in Fig 1. The component is made layer by layer and could be a gas distribution nozzle which would be called unitary. Hazarika’s gas distribution nozzle discloses an upper electrode but does not disclose two portions of the electrode and other parts as claimed.
Zhou et al disclose a gas distribution nozzle (130) and discloses an upper electrode portion (204), a lower electrode portion (206); and a plurality of joining structures that join the lower electrode portion and the upper electrode portion (228). Zhou et al disclose one gas zone divider walls to create two gas plenum chambers where the gas zone divider walls are coupled to upper and lower electrode portions.
Zhou et al disclose the showerhead coupled to the lid 104 and therefore being of conductive material like aluminum (Col 3 lines 23-26). The showerhead functions as ground electrode since RF power is coupled to the substrate support.
Regarding materials and use of joining structures to help transfer RF and thermal energy between upper and lower electrodes, Barns et al disclose them more explicitly.
As Hazarika et al disclose instructions and digital information to allow manufacturing of components of the plasma chamber including gas distribution nozzle, using such information to make it to the specification of Zhou et al or Barns et al as discussed below would have been obvious before the filing date of this application.
Barns et al disclose an upper electrode portion (Fig 1, 1); a lower electrode portion (2); and a plurality of joining structures that join the lower electrode portion and the upper electrode portion (4).
Wherein the upper electrode portion, the lower electrode portion, the plurality of joining structures, and the one or more gas zone divider walls are of a same material like aluminum (Col 2 lines 9-13); each of the plurality of joining structures is positioned between and coupled to the upper electrode portion and the lower electrode portion (Fig 1).
the one or more gas zone divider walls are configured to separate a region between the upper electrode portion and the lower electrode portion into two or more plenum chambers ().
Regarding the limitation “each of the plurality of joining structures is configured to transfer radio- frequency (RF) energy and thermal energy between the upper electrode portion and the lower electrode portion”, it is noted that the electrical and thermal conductivity of aluminum provides that (Abstract, Col 2 line 1-8, lines 42-48 and 59-65 and claim 1).
Claim 2-3 are disclosed by Hazarika et al as disclosed above.
Claims 4 is disclosed more explicitly by Barns et al as discussed above.
Claim 5 is disclosed more explicitly by Zhou et al as discussed above.
Claim 6 is disclosed more explicitly by Zhou et al as discussed above.
Regarding claims 7 and 14 cooling portion above the upper electrode portion is disclosed in Barns et al (Fig 1, 20) and Zhou et al (Fig 3, 112 and 202).
Regarding claim 9 RF power to couple RF energy to gas is disclosed (Barns Col 1 lines 58-67).
Regarding claim 10 joining structures appear to be cylindrical (Barns Fig 2 and Zhou Fig 4).
Claim 12 is rejected along with claim 1 for the same reason.
Regarding claim 13 same material is aluminum as discussed above.
Claims 8, 11, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hazarika et al (US 20240062997) in view of Barns et al (US 6818096) and Zhou et al (US 8440049) and Mandrekar et al (US 6117245).
Hazarika et al in view of Barns et al and Zhou et al disclose a unitary gas distribution nozzle and temperature control using coolant channels but Mandrekar et al disclose such control and use of plurality of sensors.
Mandrekar et al disclose a temperature control system for controlling temperature of the gas distribution nozzle and disclose detection and control of temperature and flow rate of fluid (Fig 2, 4 Col 7 lines 23-65).
Therefore, having sensors embedded in the gas distribution nozzle for feedback control of temperature would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of this application.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Alon Ganany (US 20230131502) disclosed a 3D printed showerhead (Fig 2 and Para 34, 50).
Carlo Waldfried (US 20230093910) also disclosed a 3D printed showerhead (Fig 3).
Le et al (US 20190228120) discloses designing and 3D printing a showerhead including machine readable medium (Fig 1, 113), input/output units and manufacturing unit.
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 RAM N KACKAR whose telephone number is (571)272-1436. The examiner can normally be reached 09:00 AM-05:00 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 5712721435. 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.
RAM N. KACKAR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1716
/RAM N KACKAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights