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
In response to Election/Restrictions, applicant elected claims 1-8. Election was made with traverse in the reply filed on 03/10/2026. Applicant’s argument regarding claim 1 – 8 and specifically claim 4 and independent claim 9 limitations were not found not persuasive as Product/Process restriction was not based upon dependent claim 4.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of
the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boguslavskiy et al. (US 2012/0304926, hereinafter Boguslavskiy).
With respect to claim 1, Boguslavskiy discloses a method of analyzing uniformity for substrate processing applicable for semiconductor manufacturing (para 0005; and 0047-0048 – non-uniformities during the process can be detected - changes in the properties of individual wafer carries can be detected using the images and, particularly, by comparing an image to a previously-acquired image of the same carrier), the method comprising: heating an internal volume of a processing chamber using a target value (Para 0022; 0032; 0052;0064-0065 –The wafer carrier is heated to a predetermined temperature); rotating a substrate support (Para 0039 and 0052 – rotating a wafer carrier); scanning, while rotating the substrate support, a sensor across one or more sections to take a plurality of readings (Abstract; para 0036; 0051-0052; 0060-0061– pyrometer is used to move over a plurality of positions relative to the top surface of the carrier and/or the wafer transverse to the axis of rotation and is further adapted to produce characterization signals over the plurality of positions on at least a portion of the carrier and/or on at least a portion of said major surface of the wafer as the carrier rotates); generating a signal profile including the plurality of readings (Para 0037-0038; 0052 and 0064).
In the same embodiment, Boguslavskiy does not explicitly disclose analyzing the signal profile by comparing the signal profile to a range.
However, in another embodiment Boguslavskiy discloses analyzing the signal profile by comparing the signal profile to a range (Para 0047; 0052; 0054-0055 – the bowing/curvature of the wafer can be verified by measuring the within-wafer thermal profiles and setting an upper and lower limit for passing criteria).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Boguslavskiy’s method by comparing the signal profile to a range in order to perform failure analysis of a semiconductor device to improve the processing quality.
Claims 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boguslavskiy in view of Bao et al. (US 2004/0039473, hereinafter Bao).
With respect to claim 2, Boguslavskiy does not explicitly disclose wherein the analyzing comprises: identifying a signal difference in the signal profile; and determining if the signal difference is within or outside of the range.
In an analogous art, Bao discloses wherein the analyzing comprises: identifying a signal difference in the signal profile; and determining if the signal difference is within or outside of the range (Para 0011; and 0036-0037).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Boguslavskiy’s method by having Bao’s disclosure in order to regulate different parameters based on the analysis to achieve the optimal processing results.
With respect to claim 4, Boguslavskiy/Bao discloses the method of claim 2.
Boguslavskiy does not explicitly disclose if the signal difference is outside of the range, conducting one or more of: indicating a process non-uniformity; or rejecting the signal profile.
In an analogous art, Bao discloses if the signal difference is outside of the range, conducting one or more of: indicating a process non-uniformity (360-370 of Fig. 3); or rejecting the signal profile (440-460 of Fig. 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Boguslavskiy’s method by having Bao’s disclosure in order to regulate different parameters based on the analysis to achieve the optimal processing results.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boguslavskiy/Bao in view of Melker et al. (US 2009/0043179, hereinafter Melker).
With respect to claim 3, Boguslavskiy/Bao discloses the method of claim 2.
Boguslavskiy/Bao does not explicitly disclose wherein the identifying of the signal difference comprises identifying one or more peaks and one or more troughs of the signal profile.
In an analogous art, Melker discloses wherein the identifying of the signal difference comprises identifying one or more peaks and one or more troughs of the signal profile (para 0016-0020 and 0022). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Boguslavskiy/Bao’s method by having Melker’s disclosure in order to compare the results with a threshold to determine abnormalities in the processing system.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boguslavskiy/Bao in view of Schneider (CN 102435215, Schneider).
With respect to claim 5, Boguslavskiy/Bao discloses the method of claim 2.
Boguslavskiy/Bao does not explicitly disclose wherein a field of view of the sensor is substantially stationary during the scanning such that the one or more sections extend azimuthally, and the range is less than 2.5% of the target value.
In am analogous art, Schneider discloses wherein a field of view of the sensor is substantially stationary during the scanning such that the one or more sections extend azimuthally (Para 0011; 0040), and the range is less than 2.5% of the target value (Para 0014 and 0062).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Boguslavskiy/Bao’s method by having Melker’s disclosure in order to compare the results with a threshold to determine abnormalities in the processing system.
With respect to claim 6, Boguslavskiy/Bao discloses the method of claim 2.
Boguslavskiy/Bao does not explicitly disclose wherein a field of view of the sensor is moved during the scanning such that the one or more sections extend radially, and the range is less than 10% of the target value.
In an analogous art, Schneider discloses wherein a field of view of the sensor is moved during the scanning such that the one or more sections extend radially (Para 0012; 0021; 0057), and the range is less than 10% of the target value (Para 0014 & 0062). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Boguslavskiy/Bao’s method by having Schneider’s disclosure in order to achieve the optimal results.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boguslavskiy/Bao in view of Jones et al. (US 2018/0070857, hereinafter Jones).
With respect to claim 7, Boguslavskiy/Bao discloses the method of claim 2.
Boguslavskiy/Bao does not explicitly disclose wherein the identifying of the signal difference comprises determining a standard deviation of the signal profile.
In an analogous art, Jones discloses wherein the identifying of the signal difference comprises determining a standard deviation of the signal profile (Para 0543; 593; and 0636). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Boguslavskiy/Bao’s method by having Jones’s disclosure in order to perform a quantitative analysis of the processing measurements to reduce the failures.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boguslavskiy in view of Gaff et al. (US 2011/0143462, hereinafter Gaff).
With respect to claim 8, Boguslavskiy discloses the method of claim 1.
Boguslavskiy does not explicitly disclose wherein: the one or more sections are disposed along the substrate support or along a substrate positioned on the substrate support; and the target value is a target temperature, the sensor is a temperature sensor, the plurality of readings are a plurality of temperature readings, the signal difference is a temperature difference, and the signal profile is a temperature profile.
In an analogous art, Gaff discloses wherein: the one or more sections are disposed along the substrate support or along a substrate positioned on the substrate support (Para 0004 and 0028); and the target value is a target temperature, the sensor is a temperature sensor, the plurality of readings are a plurality of temperature readings (Para 0006), the signal difference is a temperature difference (Para 0028), and the signal profile is a temperature profile (Para 0010 and 0012). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Boguslavskiy’s method by having Gaff’s disclosure in order to perform a quantitative analysis of the processing measurements to reduce the failures.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD M CHOUDHRY whose telephone number is (571)270-5716. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday.
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, Fairbanks Brent can be reached at 408-918-7532. 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.
/MOHAMMAD M CHOUDHRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights