DETAILED ACTION
Table of Contents
I. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 3
II. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 3
III. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 3
A. Claims 17-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2009/0088001 (“Nakagawa”). 4
IV. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 5
A. Claims 1-6, 9-11, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6,204,194 (“Takagi”) in view of US 2014/0134332 (“Sugino”). 5
V. Allowable Subject Matter 10
VI. Response to Arguments 11
Conclusion 11
[The rest of this page is intentionally left blank.]
I. 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 .
II. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant’s submission filed on 03/16/2026 has been entered.
III. 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.
(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.
A. Claims 17-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2009/0088001 (“Nakagawa”).
With regard to claims 17-20, Nakagawa discloses,
17. (currently amended) A method of manufacturing a semiconductor device, the method comprising:
[1] loading substrates 5 on a substrate boat 37 [¶ 47; as shown in Fig. 1];
[2] placing the substrate boat 37 [¶ 23] in a reaction tube 3 [¶ 31] after loading the substrates 5 [¶ 47; as shown in Fig. 1];
[3] performing a semiconductor manufacturing process [¶¶ 45-56, e.g. ALD or CVD of, e.g., SiN] with respect to the substrates 5 in the reaction tube 3; and
[4] unloading the substrates 5 after performing the semiconductor manufacturing process [¶ 56],
[5a] wherein the reaction tube 3 includes:
[5b] an upper portion [i.e. the curved top portion of 3 over the wafer boat 37];
[5c] a side portion [vertical sidewall portion 3, 4a, 4b] coupled to the upper portion, the side portion including gas slits 9a [¶¶ 37-38; Figs. 6(a)-(b)] and an exhausting hole 8 [¶ 42]; and
[5d] baffles 21a, 22a on an inner side surface of the side portion, excluding the exhaust hole 8.
18. (currently amended) The method of claim 17, wherein the performing the semiconductor manufacturing process comprises supplying, in a horizontal direction, a process gas to a region on an upper surface of each of the substrates 5 [¶¶ 51-55, 63; Fig. 9, Fig. 3(b)].
19. (original) The method of claim 17, wherein the performing the semiconductor manufacturing process comprises rotating the substrate boat 37 in a clockwise or counterclockwise direction [¶¶ 33, 44, 47, 56].
20. (original) The method of claim 17, wherein the performing the semiconductor manufacturing process comprises forming at least one from among a silicon oxide layer, a silicon nitride layer, and a silicon oxynitride layer on the substrates 5 [¶¶ 45-46].
21. (new) The method of claim 17, wherein placing the substrate boat 37 in the reaction tube 3 comprises placing an upper surface of each of the substrates 5 at a same level as an upper surface of a respective one of the baffles [¶ 63; Fig. 9 shows that the upper surface of each of the baffles 22a at the tip is level with the upper surface of the substrate 5 which directs the gas from the slit 9a across the upper surface of the substrate 5].
IV. 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 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.
A. Claims 1-6, 9-11, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6,204,194 (“Takagi”) in view of US 2014/0134332 (“Sugino”).
Claim 1 reads,
1. (previously presented): A semiconductor manufacturing apparatus, comprising:
[1] a substrate boat configured to load a plurality of substrates;
[2] a process chamber configured to enclose the substrate boat; and
[3] a reaction tube between the substrate boat and the process chamber,
[4a] wherein the reaction tube comprises:
[4b] a gas flowing part configured to allow for a flow of a process gas;
[4c] a process part defining gas slits and an exhausting hole; and
[4d] baffles on an inner side surface of the process part, excluding the exhausting hole,
[5] wherein the process part comprises an upper portion and a side portion that are coupled to each other, and
[6] wherein the gas slits and the exhausting hole are defined in the side portion.
With regard to claim 1, Takagi discloses,
1. (previously presented): A semiconductor manufacturing apparatus, comprising:
[1] a substrate boat 18/7a-7d configured to load a plurality of substrates 5 [col. 11, lines 43-63, lines 56; Fig. 2; col. 6, lines 3-27];
[2] a process chamber 4 [col. 8, line 40] configured to enclose the substrate boat 18/7a-7d; and
[3] a reaction tube 2 [col. 8, line 36] between the substrate boat 18/7a-7d and the process chamber 4,
[4a] wherein the reaction tube 2 comprises:
[4b] a gas flowing part 10(=10a, 10b, 10c) [Figs. 2, 4, 5; col. 9, lines 58-67] configured to allow for a flow of a process gas;
[4c] a process part [reaction tube 2 other than 10] defining gas …[ports 17 (col. 9, lines 43-46; Figs. 2, 5)]… and an exhausting hole 20(21) [Figs. 2-4, 6; col. 10, lines 1-14]; and
[4d] baffles 26 [Figs. 2, 4-6; col. 10, lines 30-42] on an inner side surface of the process part [side wall of reaction tube 2], excluding the exhausting hole 20(21),
[5] wherein the process part [reaction tube 2 other than 10] comprises an upper portion [top of 2] and a side portion [side walls of 2] that are coupled to each other, and
[6] wherein the gas …[ports 17]… and the exhausting hole 20(21) are defined in the side portion [as shown in Figs. 2-6].
With regard to features [4c] and [6] of claim 1, Takagi does not give the shape of the ports 17, showing only a side view, and does not make clear whether or not they are “slits” as required by features [4c] and [6].
Sugino, like Takagi, teaches a batch vertical wafer processing apparatus (Sugino, abstract), including a gas supply tube 104. Sugino teaches that the ports 106 in the gas supply tubes 104 can be round, as shown in Figs. 1, 5B, 6B, or can be slits, as shown in Fig. 7B, i.e. oval or rectangular (¶ 49).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to make the ports 17 in Takagi slit shaped, e.g. oval or rectangular, because Takagi is silent as to the shape of the ports 17, such that one having ordinary skill in the art would use known shapes, such as a rectangle, i.e. a “slit”, as taught in Sugino to be a matter of design choice.
Moreover, it has been held that differences in shape are an obvious matter of design choice absent persuasive evidence that a particular shape is significant. See In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) (The court held that the configuration of the claimed disposable plastic nursing container was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant.). (See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(B).) Here, there is no evidence in the Instant Application that the slit shape of the ports 120s in the “gas flowing part” 110 are significant.
This is all of the limitations of claim 1.
With regard to claims 2 and 3,
2. (original): The semiconductor manufacturing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the baffles 26 have an arc shape when viewed in a plan view [as shown in Fig. 4].
3. (original): The semiconductor manufacturing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the baffles 26 are spaced apart from each other in a vertical direction [as shown in Figs. 2 and 5].
With regard to claims 4-6, Takagi modified to have the ports 17 have a slit shape, as taught by Sugino (supra), further teaches,
4. (original): The semiconductor manufacturing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the gas slits 17 [of Takagi/Sugino] are in the process part that is adjacent to the gas flowing part, and the exhausting hole 20(21) is in the process part that is opposite to the gas slits [as shown in Fig. 4].
5. (original): The semiconductor manufacturing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the gas slits 17 [of Takagi/Sugino] extend in a horizontal direction [as shown in Fig. 7B Sugino] and are spaced apart from each other in a vertical direction [as shown in each of Takagi and Sugino].
6. (original): The semiconductor manufacturing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the baffles are not overlapped with the gas slits in a horizontal direction.
The ports 17 are not overlapped in Takagi (Figs. 2 and 5) to every extent that they are not overlapped in the Instant Application (Figs. 2 and 3).
With regard to claim 9, Takagi modified to have the ports 17 have a slit shape, as taught by Sugino (supra), further teaches,
9. (previously presented): The semiconductor manufacturing apparatus of claim 1, wherein an upper surface of each of the baffles 26 is coplanar with an upper surface of a respective portion of the side portion 2 between the gas slits 17 [of Takagi/Sugino, as shown in Figs. 2 and 5 of Takagi].
With regard to claims 10 and 11, Takagi further discloses,
10. (previously presented): The semiconductor manufacturing apparatus of claim 1, wherein a distance in a horizontal direction between an innermost part of the baffles 26 and a center of a process space of the process part [reaction tube 2 other than 10] is smaller than a distance in the horizontal direction between an innermost part of the side portion [side wall of 2] and the center of the process part [as shown in Figs. 2, 4, and 5].
11. (previously presented): The semiconductor manufacturing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the baffles 26 and the process part [reaction tube 2 other than 10] are integrally formed.
With regard to claims 13-15, Takagi modified to have the ports 17 have a slit shape, as taught by Sugino (supra), teaches,
13. (previously presented): A reaction tube 2, comprising:
[1] a side portion [2 other than 10] defining gas slits 17 [of Takagi/Sugino] that are spaced apart from each other in a vertical direction [as shown in Figs. 2 and 5 of Takagi and in Fig. 7B of Sugino], and
[2] an exhausting hole 20(21), that is opposite to the gas slits 17 [of Takagi/Sugino];
[3] an upper portion [top of 2] connected to the side portion [2 other than 10];
[4] baffles 26 that are on an inner side surface of the side portion [2 other than 10], excluding on the exhausting hole 20(21), and are spaced apart from each other in the vertical direction [as shown in Figs. 2 and 5 of Takagi]; and
[5] a gas flowing part 10(=10a, 10b, 10c) [Figs. 2, 4, 5] adjacent to the gas slits 17 [of Takagi/Sugino] of the side portion [2 other than 10],
[6] wherein upper surfaces of portions of the side portion [2 other than 10] between the gas slits 17 [of Takagi/Sugino] are at a same level as an upper surface of a respective one of the baffles 26 [as shown in Figs. 2 and 5 of Takagi], and
[7] wherein the baffles 26 have an arc shape when viewed in a plan view [as shown in Fig. 4 of Takagi].
14. (original): The reaction tube of claim 13, wherein
[1] the gas flowing part 10(=10a, 10b, 10c) [Figs. 2, 4, 5] defines a gas flowing passageway 110(=10a, 10b, 10c) [as shown in Figs. 2 and 5 of Takagi],
[2] the upper portion [top of 2] and the side portion define [2 other than 10] a process space [as shown in Fig. 2 of Takagi], and
[3] the gas flowing passageway 10(=10a, 10b, 10c) is connected to the process space through the gas slits 17 [of Takagi/Sugino] [as shown in Figs. 2 and 5 of Takagi].
15. (original): The reaction tube of claim 13, wherein each of the gas slits 17 [of Takagi/Sugino] extends in a horizontal direction, and the exhausting hole 20(21) extends in the vertical direction [as shown in Figs. 2 and 3 of Takagi].
V. Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 12, and 16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 7, 12, and 16, read,
7. (original): The semiconductor manufacturing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the baffles have different widths from each other in a horizontal direction.
12. (original): The semiconductor manufacturing apparatus of claim 1, further comprising an outer tube between the reaction tube and the process chamber.
16. (original): The reaction tube of claim 13, wherein a width of the upper surface of each of the baffles is larger than a width of a lower surface of each of the baffles.
The prior art does not reasonably teach or suggest—in the context of the claims—the specific limitations recited therein.
VI. Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 03/16/2026 have been fully considered but are moot because the new grounds of rejection do not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIK KIELIN whose telephone number is (571)272-1693. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 10:00 AM-7:00 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, Wael Fahmy can be reached on 571-272-1705. 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.
Signed,
/ERIK KIELIN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2814
Prosecution Insights