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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicants’ election, without traverse of Group I (claims 1-11 and16-20) in the reply, filed on 03/09/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 12-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 03/09/2026.
Claim interpretation
(1) In regards to the “wherein the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor is manufactured by molding, casting, machining or 3D printing” of Claim 19, and “wherein the molding comprises molding a powder precursor to form the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor” of Claim 20,
The terms are considered as product-by-process. When the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor is provided, it is considered meeting the claim language, no matter how it is constructed.
Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process, see MPEP 2113.
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 4 and 17 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
(1) The “wherein the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor comprises a non-porous material” of Claim 4 is not clear.
The term “non-porous” 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.
For instance, a lower degree of porosity or a tiny degree of porosity, such as 1%, 0.1%, 0.01% porosity might be close to the “non-porous”, but it still can be read into the “porous”.
Further, the applicants’ specification discloses “a precursor allows the carrier gas adequate residence time to become partially to nearly to fully saturated with vaporized and/or sublimed and/or entrained precursor that is carried by a carrier gas flowing through the ampoule”, see [0019] of the applicants’ published instant application.
It is considered that obtaining the “saturation” would have required the solid precursor to be at least “porous”. Thus, it is not clear how the boundary for the term “non-porous”, which is contradict to the applicants’ disclosure, is determined.
For the purpose of examination, it will be examined as either “porous” or “non-porous”.
(2) Claim 17 raises same issue of claim 4 in the item (1) above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-5, 7-9, 11 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shero et al. (US 20050072357, hereafter ‘357).
Regarding to Claim 1, ‘357 teaches:
a sublimation apparatus 29 of a semiconductor processing system, and "flowable" support elements comprising beads 6 which are packed into the sublimation vessel 1 (Fig. 2A, [0070]), and "Flowable support elements" refers to elements that can be coated with solid precursor and poured into or out of a vessel, such as beads ([0064], the claimed “An ampoule comprising: a container defining a cavity configured to hold a solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor”);
an inlet port 2 of the vessel 1 and an outlet port 3 of the vessel 1 ([0067], the claimed “an inlet port and an outlet port, both in fluid communication with the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor”);
Beads 6 are configured and packed in order to provide a high number of potential gas contact pathways 9 for the carrier gas, ensuring that the carrier gas contacts a large surface area of solid source coating ([0071], note Fig. 2A shows a volume of the beads defined by the outermost perimeter along the beads and pathways, the claimed “the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor defined by a top edge, a bottom edge, a perimeter and at least one flow channel in the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor; and at least one flow path defined by the at least one flow channel through which a carrier gas flows in contact with the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor”).
Regarding to Claim 2,
‘357 teaches these beads are configured to provide tortuous pathways for a carrier gas ([0070], the claimed “wherein the at least one flow channel defines a labyrinth such that the at least one flow path is tortuous”).
Regarding to Claim 3,
Fig. 1 of ‘357 shows single inlet 2 and single outlet 3 (the claimed “wherein the ampoule further comprises a single inlet and a single outlet”).
Regarding to Claims 4-5,
‘357 teaches "Flowable support elements" refers to elements that can be coated with solid precursor ([0064]) and these support elements can include both porous and nonporous structures ([0075], see also the 112 rejection above, the claimed “wherein the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor comprises a non-porous material” of Claim 4, and “wherein the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor comprises a porous material” of Claim 5).
Regarding to Claim 7,
Figs. 2A-2B of ‘357 clearly show fluid connection from the inlet 2 to bottom opening of the “volume” of the precursor elements 6, and also fluid connection from top opening of the volume to the outlet 3, see the arrow 9 (the claimed “wherein a first fluid connection extends from the inlet port to an ingress opening in the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor, the ingress opening in fluid communication with both the first fluid connection and the at least one flow channel; and a second fluid connection extending from the outlet port to an outlet passage in the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor, the outlet passage in fluid communication with both the second fluid connection and the at least one flow channel”).
Regarding to Claims 8-9 and 11,
Figs. 2A-2B of ‘357 clearly show the flow passage direction is changed from the inlet to the outlet, see the arrow, the arrow has at least one curved portion, which is an arc (the claimed “wherein the at least one flow channel comprises one or more arcs” of Claim 8, “wherein in the one or more arcs are in fluid communication” of Claim 9, and “wherein the at least one flow channel comprises a plurality of tortuous passages configured so that flow of the carrier gas through the ingress opening diverts the carrier gas into a first section in a first direction and a second section in a second direction and out the outlet passage” of Claim 11).
Regarding to Claim 16, ‘357 teaches:
Figs. 2A-2B clearly shows a volume of the beads defined by the outermost perimeter along the beads (the claimed “A solid volume of a semiconductor chemical precursor, comprising: a top edge, a bottom edge, and a perimeter defining a solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor”);
Fig. 2B clearly shows a flow path, see the arrow 9, thus starting point of the arrow within the volume close to the inlet is an ingress opening, and ending point of the arrow within the volume close to the outlet is an outlet passage (the claimed “the semiconductor chemical precursor having at least one flow channel, an ingress opening, and an outlet passage, wherein the at least one flow channel is in fluid communication with the ingress opening and the outlet passage”);
gas contact pathways 9 for the carrier gas, ensuring that the carrier gas contacts a large surface area of solid source coating ([0071], the claimed “and at least one flow path defined by the at least one flow channel through which a carrier gas flows in contact with the semiconductor chemical precursor”).
Regarding to Claims 17-18,
‘357 teaches "Flowable support elements" refers to elements that can be coated with solid precursor ([0064]) and these support elements can include both porous and nonporous structures ([0075], see also the 112 rejection above, the claimed “wherein the semiconductor chemical precursor comprises a non-porous material” of Claim 17, and “wherein the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor comprises a porous material” of Claim 18).
Regarding to Claims 19-20,
‘357 teaches "Flowable support elements" refers to elements that can be coated with solid precursor ([0064], see the claim interpretation, “wherein the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor is manufactured by molding, casting, machining or 3D printing” of Claim 19, and “wherein the molding comprises molding a powder precursor to form the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor” of Claim 20).
Claims 1-3, 7-9, 11, 16 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamasaki et al. (US 20090250006, hereafter ‘006).
Regarding to Claim 1, ‘006 teaches:
container 201 holding therein a solid raw material 201A (Fig. 1A, [0060], see the production yield of semiconductor devices or the like, [0006], the claimed “An ampoule comprising: a container defining a cavity configured to hold a solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor”);
a gas line 206 having a valve 206A for supplying a carrier gas to the raw material container 201 ([0061]), and the gaseous raw material is supplied to the film formation system together with the carrier gas via the gas line 207 ([0064], the claimed “an inlet port and an outlet port, both in fluid communication with the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor”);
Figs. 1 and 3 clearly show a volume of the solid raw material 201A defined by the outermost perimeter along the solid raw materials and gas pathways of Figs. 1B-1D within the volume (the claimed “the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor defined by a top edge, a bottom edge, a perimeter and at least one flow channel in the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor; and at least one flow path defined by the at least one flow channel through which a carrier gas flows in contact with the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor”).
Regarding to Claim 2,
Fig. 1 and 3 of ‘006 clearly shows a pathway for the gas, and the direction of the pathway is not linear and is changed into multiple different directions, see the arrows ([0070], the claimed “wherein the at least one flow channel defines a labyrinth such that the at least one flow path is tortuous”).
Regarding to Claim 3,
‘006 teaches gas line 206 ([0061]), and gas line 207 ([0064], note Figs. 1 and 3 show single inlet and single outlet, the claimed “wherein the ampoule further comprises a single inlet and a single outlet”).
Regarding to Claim 7,
Figs. 1-3 of ‘006 clearly shows fluid connection from the inlet 206 to bottom opening of the “volume” of the raw material 201, and also fluid connection from top opening of the volume to the outlet 207, see the arrows (the claimed “wherein a first fluid connection extends from the inlet port to an ingress opening in the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor, the ingress opening in fluid communication with both the first fluid connection and the at least one flow channel; and a second fluid connection extending from the outlet port to an outlet passage in the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor, the outlet passage in fluid communication with both the second fluid connection and the at least one flow channel”).
Regarding to Claims 8-9 and 11,
Figs. 1-3 of ‘006 clearly shows the flow passage direction is changed from the inlet to the outlet, see the arrow, the arrow has at least one curved portion, which is an arc (the claimed “wherein the at least one flow channel comprises one or more arcs” of Claim 8, “wherein in the one or more arcs are in fluid communication” of Claim 9, and “wherein the at least one flow channel comprises a plurality of tortuous passages configured so that flow of the carrier gas through the ingress opening diverts the carrier gas into a first section in a first direction and a second section in a second direction and out the outlet passage” of Claim 11).
Regarding to Claim 16, ‘006 teaches:
Figs. 1-3 clearly shows a volume of the solid raw material 201A defined by the outermost perimeter along the materials (the claimed “A solid volume of a semiconductor chemical precursor, comprising: a top edge, a bottom edge, and a perimeter defining a solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor”);
Figs. 1-3 clearly shows a flow path, see the arrows, thus starting point of the arrow within the volume close to the inlet is an ingress opening, and ending point of the arrow within the volume close to the outlet is an outlet passage (the claimed “the semiconductor chemical precursor having at least one flow channel, an ingress opening, and an outlet passage, wherein the at least one flow channel is in fluid communication with the ingress opening and the outlet passage”);
Figs. 1-3 clearly shows the carrier gas flowing through the flow path contacts the raw materials (the claimed “and at least one flow path defined by the at least one flow channel through which a carrier gas flows in contact with the semiconductor chemical precursor”).
Regarding to Claims 19-20,
‘006 teaches the solid raw material 201A ([0060], see the claim interpretation, “wherein the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor is manufactured by molding, casting, machining or 3D printing” of Claim 19, and “wherein the molding comprises molding a powder precursor to form the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor” of Claim 20).
Claims 1-7, 11 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hendrix et al. (US 20210147977, hereafter ‘977).
Regarding to Claim 1, ‘977 teaches:
The preforms may be included in ampules for use in vapor deposition systems…The preforms may be made via pressing a powder of the solid sublimation material (abstract), and semiconductor manufacturing processes ([0002], see also Fig. 3, the claimed “An ampoule comprising: a container defining a cavity configured to hold a solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor”);
the ampule body 302 includes a carrier gas inlet 304 and a vapor outlet 306 ([0063], the claimed “an inlet port and an outlet port, both in fluid communication with the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor”);
Figs. 2-3 clearly show a volume of the preform 308 defined by the outermost perimeter and channels 102 (the claimed “the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor defined by a top edge, a bottom edge, a perimeter and at least one flow channel in the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor; and at least one flow path defined by the at least one flow channel through which a carrier gas flows in contact with the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor”).
Regarding to Claim 2,
‘977 teaches The alignment of the plurality of preforms 308 may be to provide a tortuous path for carrier gas or vapor through the ampule ([0070], the claimed “wherein the at least one flow channel defines a labyrinth such that the at least one flow path is tortuous”).
Regarding to Claim 3,
Fig. 3 of ‘977 shows single inlet 304 and single outlet 306 (the claimed “wherein the ampoule further comprises a single inlet and a single outlet”).
Regarding to Claims 4-5,
‘977 teaches Channels 102 are holes or pores formed through the preform 100 ([0051], see also the 112 rejection above, the claimed “wherein the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor comprises a non-porous material” of Claim 4, and “wherein the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor comprises a porous material” of Claim 5).
Regarding to Claim 6,
Fig. 1 of ‘977 clearly shows a percentage of the channel 102 is more than 5% and less than 95% (the claimed “wherein the porous material has a porosity in a range of 5-95 percent by volume”).
Regarding to Claim 7,
Fig. 3 of ‘977 clearly shows channel 102 is open to the ampule bottom section where the carrier gas is distributed, thus there should be fluid connection from the inlet 304 to the bottom end of the channel 102 in the preform volume, and further the channel is open to ampoule top section, thus there should be fluid connection from top end of the channel 102 to the outlet 306 (the claimed “wherein a first fluid connection extends from the inlet port to an ingress opening in the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor, the ingress opening in fluid communication with both the first fluid connection and the at least one flow channel; and a second fluid connection extending from the outlet port to an outlet passage in the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor, the outlet passage in fluid communication with both the second fluid connection and the at least one flow channel”).
Regarding to Claim 11,
‘977 teaches The alignment of the plurality of preforms 308 may be to provide a tortuous path for carrier gas or vapor through the ampule. The vapor may travel along grooves formed in the surfaces of preforms, such as grooves 104 described above, to pass from the channels of one preform to the channels of the adjacent preform. The tortuous path may improve saturation of the vapor with the sublimated solid sublimation material ([0070], note the path comprises both vertical paths and horizontal paths, the claimed “wherein the at least one flow channel comprises a plurality of tortuous passages configured so that flow of the carrier gas through the ingress opening diverts the carrier gas into a first section in a first direction and a second section in a second direction and out the outlet passage”).
Regarding to Claim 16, ‘977 teaches:
Figs. 1-3 clearly show a volume of the preforms defined by the outermost perimeter along the preform (the claimed “A solid volume of a semiconductor chemical precursor, comprising: a top edge, a bottom edge, and a perimeter defining a solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor”);
Channels 102 are holes or pores formed through the preform 100 ([0051], the claimed “the semiconductor chemical precursor having at least one flow channel, an ingress opening, and an outlet passage, wherein the at least one flow channel is in fluid communication with the ingress opening and the outlet passage”);
The alignment of the plurality of preforms 208 to ensure that channels of adjacent preforms are misaligned with respect to one another can provide a tortuous path for carrier gas or vapor through the ampule ([0062], the claimed “and at least one flow path defined by the at least one flow channel through which a carrier gas flows in contact with the semiconductor chemical precursor”).
Regarding to Claims 17-18,
‘977 teaches Channels 102 are holes or pores formed through the preform 100 ([0051], see also the 112 rejection above, the claimed “wherein the semiconductor chemical precursor comprises a non-porous material” of Claim 17, and “wherein the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor comprises a porous material” of Claim 18).
Regarding to Claims 19-20,
‘977 teaches the solid sublimation material is provided as a powder at 404, the preform may be prepared at 406 by closing the mold and applying pressure to form a pressed powder of the solid sublimation material ([0074], see also the claim interpretation, “wherein the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor is manufactured by molding, casting, machining or 3D printing” of Claim 19, and “wherein the molding comprises molding a powder precursor to form the solid volume of the semiconductor chemical precursor” of Claim 20).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Alternatively, claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘977.
In case the applicants keep arguing that ‘977 does not explicitly teach the limitations of Claim 6.
Based on the figures of ‘977, it appears that more channels (hole or pores) result in more gas flow. Therefore, a porosity ratio of the preform with respect to the total volume of the preform controls the flow rate of the gas flow, in other words, it is a result effective parameter to control the flow rate passing through the preform.
Consequently, even if ‘977 is silent about the feature as recited,
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have adopted a porosity as recited, to the preform of ‘977, for the purpose of controlling the flow rate, and/or since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, see MPEP 2144.05.
Claims 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘977, in view of Soininen (US 20070170604, hereafter ‘604).
Regarding to Claims 8-10,
‘977 does not explicitly teach the other limitations (BOLD and ITALIC letter) of:
Claim 8: wherein the at least one flow channel comprises one or more arcs.
Claim 9: wherein in the one or more arcs are in fluid communication.
Claim 10: wherein the one or more arcs are concentric arcs.
Emphasized again, ‘977 clearly teaches provides a tortuous path for the vapor, improving the consistency of saturation of the vapor ultimately produced within an ampule including one or more of the preform 100 ([0053]), thus ‘977 clearly acknowledges needs of the tortuous path.
‘604 is analogous art in the field of vapor source containers ([0002]) having a tortuous path for the gas (abstract). ‘604 teaches As shown in FIG. 12b, a gas flow labyrinth within the inner compartment 1200 can be machined, for example, from a block of metal. Circular gas flow channels are separated from each other by additional flow dividers in the form of walls 1220 that extend a height 1206 from the bottom to the wall 1208 of the inner compartment 1200. Openings 1222 are machined into the walls 1220, preferably on alternated sides, so that gases flow along a tortuous path from one circular channel to the next one until the exit point 1204 of the inner compartment 1200 is reached. (Fig. 12b, [0068], note each circular gas flow channel has a curved shape, which is an arc, and the circular gas flow channels are concentric).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the preforms of ‘977, so to have circular gas flow channels separated from each other by walls and also having openings on alternated sides, thus gases flow along a tortuous path from one circular channel to the next one until the exit point, for the purpose of providing increased resident time, thus further providing gradually saturated gas flow.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AIDEN Y LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1440. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 9am-5pm 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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached on 571-272-5166. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AIDEN LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Prosecution Insights