CTNF 18/238,810 CTNF 89221 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 Applicant's election with traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 1/22/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that examination of the claims as a whole would not present a serious search or examination burden on the Examiner. This is not found persuasive because Invention I would require a search in at least CPC C30B25/165 along with a unique text search. Invention Il would not be searched as above and would require a search in at least CPC H01L21/02211 along with a unique text search. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claims 15-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 1/22/26. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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 1-14 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claims 1, 9 recite the limitations, the deposition FD and the carrier FD. However, while the claim mentions a deposition flow divider (FD) flow controller and a carrier FD flow controller, it is unclear if the deposition and carrier FDs are referring to/the same as the said flow controllers themselves or different/separate structures that were not previously and clearly introduced, perhaps to which the flow controllers are connected. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claims 1, 9 also mention a second FC having a second inlet and an outlet, the first inlet fluidly coupled to a second outlet. However, it is unclear why the first inlet is mentioned in association with the second FC, when the first inlet is part of the first FC. For instance, when both the first FC and the third FC are discussed, the first and third inlets are used. The first inlet is not part of or associated with the second FC. Claim 9 also states that a plurality of optically transparent windows…defining and processing volume. It is unclear what they are defining. Perhaps the word ‘and’ is meant to be ‘a’. Claim 9 also states that the first FC having a first inlet and a first inlet. However, it is unclear why the first inlet is duplicated. It is unclear if the second instance is meant as a second inlet or is a typographical mistake. Claim 9 also states ‘the carrier PFD’. However, this was never mentioned and it is unclear if it is the same or different as the carrier FD. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The dependent claims are also rejected by dependency to rejected claims 1, 9. 07-36 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. 07-36-01 AIA Claim s 2, 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. The claims cite that the deposition and carrier FDs each comprises three outlets. However, claim 1 already stated that each of the deposition and carrier FDs comprises three outlets, i.e. their first, second and third outlets. Therefore, the claims fail to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which they depend, i.e. claim 1 . Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-5, 9-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi (US 20070186972) in view of Kubota (US 20140234992) . Regarding claim 1. Kobayashi teaches in fig. 1 a gas delivery module, comprising: a deposition flow divider (FD) flow controller (first gas distributor 14-1 [43]) configured to control a flow of deposition gas (controls a wide variety of gases from 13-1 to 13-8, eg C4F8 [43] fig. 1, is a coating/passivating gas, i.e. in the Bosch process; however, the processing gas/chemical is an intended use, is a process ingredient that can be exchanged according to user requirements and is not an apparatus structure/structurally limits the apparatus, MPEP 2114) through a plurality of outlets of the deposition FD (fig. 1, two outlets from 14-1 allowing the gases to exit); a carrier FD flow controller (second gas distributor 14-2 [44]) configured to control a flow of carrier gas (controls flow of N2 gas from 13-10, fig. 1 [44], which is often an inert used to mix/carry w/ other process gases; again, the gas used is an intended use) through a plurality of outlets of the carrier FD (fig. 1, two outlets from 14-2 allowing the gases to exit); and a plurality of flow controllers (FCs) (valves 23-1 to 23-4 [54-56] fig. 1), the plurality of flow controllers comprising: a first FC (one of the said four valves 23-1 to 23-4) having a first inlet and an outlet (each of the four valves have an upstream inlet/inflow end and downstream outlet/outflow end), the first inlet of the first FC fluidly coupled to a first outlet of the plurality of outlets of the deposition FD (the upstream end of each valve is fluidly coupled to one of the two outlets of 14-1, fig. 1) and to a first outlet of the plurality of outlets of the carrier FD (similarly, the upstream end of each valve is fluidly coupled to one of the two outlets of 14-2, fig. 1); a second FC (a second/another one of the four valves 23-1, 23-4) having a second inlet and an outlet (as disc, upstream inlet/inflow end and downstream outlet/outflow end, fig. 1), the first inlet fluidly coupled to a second outlet of the plurality of outlets of the deposition FD (if the first inlet is meant as second, and the first FC is, eg 23-1, the second FC/23-2’s inlet is fluidly coupled to the other one of the two outlets of 14-1, fig. 1; even assuming the first FC’s inlet being coupled to both, 23-2’s inlet is coupled to both outlets of 14-1, at least structurally via the interconnected bypass joint after 23-4/23-3 and through showerhead 10/11, fig. 1) and to a second outlet of the plurality of outlets of the carrier FD (same concept to the just discussed vis a vis deposition FD; i.e. top inlet end of 23-2 also coupled to other/2 nd outlet of 14-2, fig. 1); but does not teach a third FC having a third inlet and an outlet, the third inlet fluidly coupled to a third outlet of the plurality of outlets of the deposition FD and to a third outlet of the plurality of outlets of the carrier FD. However, Kubota teaches in fig. 1, 2 the showerhead having four separated flow zones [80], while Kobayashi has two, fig. 6-9; By adding at least an additional flow zone to Kobayashi’s showerhead, at least a duplicated third line with its own valve/FC w/ its inlet/outlet, the inlet being connected to an additional outlet from each of 14-1/14-2, in the same way as the discussed 23-1/2 were configured, is necessary to disperse the same gases from all the zones, Fig. 1. It would be obvious to those skilled in the art at the time of the invention to modify Kobayashi to more finely and precisely optimize and control gas flow diffusion effects across the wafer to improve processing uniformity, Kubota [119]. Furthermore, per MPEP 2144.04, it has been held that matters related to duplication of parts did not render the claims patentable. Regarding claim 2. Kobayashi in view of Kubota teaches the gas delivery module of claim 1, wherein the deposition FD comprises three outlets (as discussed, 14-2 has at least three outlets for the at least three showerhead zones). Regarding claim 3. Kobayashi in view of Kubota teaches the gas delivery module of claim 1, wherein the carrier FD comprises three outlets (same idea as disc claim 2, except for 14-1). Regarding claim 4. Kobayashi in view of Kubota teaches the gas delivery module of claim 1, wherein the deposition FD has an inlet (14-2 has a right/inflow connection fig. 1) configured to receive deposition gas from a deposition gas source and another gas from another gas source (it receives at least the C4F8 from source 13-4 and at least another one of other seven gas sources fig. 1). Regarding claim 5. Kobayashi in view of Kubota, teaches the gas delivery module of claim 1, wherein the carrier FD has an inlet (14-1 has a right/inflow connection fig. 1) configured to receive carrier gas from a carrier gas source and another gas from another gas source (it receives at least the N2 from source 13-10 and from O2 source fig. 1). Regarding claim 9. Kobayashi teaches a processing chamber (same name, 1 [abstract]), suitable for use in semiconductor manufacturing ([12]), comprising: a chamber body (fig. 1, the walled structure bounding the chamber 1); a plurality of optically transparent windows (fig. 1, 5 the quartz, which is known as an optically transparent material, member 28 is made of 2 pieces with a seal 21 between their border, and each piece capable of allowing at least some passage of radiation, at least diagonally and vertically, from the adjacent antenna 3) coupled to the chamber body (fig. 1, attached to the wall of 1) and defining and processing volume (28 defines at least upper parts of the process volume inside 1, fig. 1); a susceptor (electrode 4, which serves as a susceptor holding the wafer [35] fig. 1 and absorbs RF/EM energy from RF 5C) disposed in the processing volume (inside space of 1, fig. 1); and a gas delivery module (as disc in claim 1), comprising; a deposition flow divider (FD) flow controller configured to control a flow of deposition gas through a plurality of outlets of the deposition FD; a carrier FD flow controller configured to control a flow of carrier gas through a plurality of outlets of the carrier FD; and a plurality of flow controllers (FCs), the plurality of flow controllers comprising: a first FC having a first inlet and a first inlet (for compact prosecution, the duplicate first inlet is interpreted as a typographical mistake, consistent w/ claim 1 and fig. 4 of the application) and an outlet, the first inlet of the first FC fluidly coupled to a first outlet of the plurality of outlets of the deposition FD and to a first outlet of the plurality of outlets of the carrier PFD (for compact prosecution, this is interpreted as carrier FD, consistent w/ claim 1 and fig. 4 of the application); a second FC having a second inlet and an outlet, the first inlet fluidly coupled to a second outlet of the plurality of outlets of the deposition FD and to a second outlet of the plurality of outlets of the carrier FD; and, further in view of Kubota, teaches a third FC having a third inlet and an outlet, the third inlet fluidly coupled to a third outlet of the plurality of outlets of the deposition FD and to a third outlet of the plurality of outlets of the carrier FD (all the previous language related to the gas delivery module and its details, see claim 1 of Kobayashi in view of Kubota). Regarding claim 10. Kobayashi in view of Kubota teaches the processing chamber of claim 9, further comprising a plurality of inject channels (the holes/channels through the showerplate 11 and dispersion plate 10 and also upper channels/outlets 36-1/2, fig. 1, 9 which inject the gases downwards into the showerhead and eventually into the process space inside 1), where each inject channel is coupled to the outlet of one of the first FC, the second FC, or the third FC (at least a zonal section of the holes in 11 and 10, either more central or peripheral depending on the particular FC, since each FCs is responsible for a gas flow zone in the showerhead, are fluidly connected to at least the outlet of the first FC/valve, fig. 1, 5, 6, 9, to receive the gases for that zone). Regarding claim 11. Kobayashi in view of Kubota, teaches the processing chamber of claim 10, wherein two inject channels of the plurality of inject channels are both coupled to the outlet of the second FC (as discussed at least multiple channels in 10/11 are fluidly connected to each of 23-1 23-2/their outlets, eg fig. 1 at least six channels/holes in the peripheral zone are fluidly connected to outlet of 23-2 and seven central channels to outlet of 23-1). Regarding claim 12. Kobayashi in view of Kubota teaches the processing chamber of claim 11, wherein the two inject channels of the plurality of inject channels are both outer inject channels of an injector insert (as disc in claim 11, at least six peripheral zone channels of a showerhead 10/11 inserted into chamber 1, fig. 1). Regarding claim 13. Kobayashi in view of Kubota teaches the processing chamber of claim 12, wherein two additional inject channels of the plurality of inject channels are both coupled to the outlet of the third FC (as disc in claim 1, a duplicate zone of channels, e.g. similar to one of the four zones in the showerhead fig. 1, 2 Kubota, also having multiple channels/holes coupled to a duplicate FC/valve and its outlet, as disc in claim 1). Regarding claim 14. Kobayashi in view of Kubota teaches the processing chamber of claim 13, wherein the additional two inject channels of the plurality of inject channels are both middle inject channels of the injector insert (it is noted the term middle is very broad and does not specify an exact dimension or location and can be middle circumferentially/axially or longitudinally/laterally; as disc previously, Kubota fig. 1, 2, the at least two holes are part of an additional zone, which can be middle circumferentially, which is true for all the holes since a line can be cut through any pair in any zone to bisect the circular showerhead/insert and at least two relatively central zones where all the holes are central/middle of the showerhead/insert, Kubota fig. 2) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi (US 20070186972) in view of Kubota (US 20140234992) and Cheng (US 20040118342) . Regarding claim 6. Kobayashi in view of Kubota, teaches the gas delivery module of claim 1, but does not teach wherein the first FC comprises a plurality of outlets. However, Cheng teaches in fig. 1b at least the FC/valves 32AB, 23A each comprises a plurality of outlets (two outlets, one to chamber, one to bypass to the exhaust), similar to Kobayashi’s exhaust bypassing 23-3/4 that can also be the first/second FCs, as mentioned in claim 1, since each have inlet/outlet with the inlet being connected to separate pairs of outlets from 14-1, 2, fig. 1. It would be obvious to those skilled in the art at the time of invention to modify Kobayashi to provide an alternate to two-way valves [24] that allow exhaust bypassing. Regarding claim 7. Kobayashi in view of Kubota, teaches the gas delivery module of claim 1, but does not teach wherein the second FC comprises a plurality of outlets. However, as discussed in claim 6, Cheng teaches in fig. 1b at least the FC/valves 32AB, 23A each comprises a plurality of outlets (two outlets, one to chamber, one to bypass to the exhaust), similar to Kobayashi’s exhaust bypassing 23-3/4 that can also be the first/second FCs, as mentioned in claim 1, since each have inlet/outlet with the inlet being connected to separate pairs of outlets from 14-1, 2, fig. 1. It would be obvious to those skilled in the art at the time of invention to modify Kobayashi to provide an alternate to two-way valves [24] that allow exhaust bypassing. Regarding claim 8. Kobayashi, in view of Kubota teaches the gas delivery module of claim 1, but does not teach wherein the third FC comprises a plurality of outlets. However, as discussed in claim 6, Cheng teaches in fig. 1b at least the FC/valves 32AB, 23A each comprises a plurality of outlets (two outlets, one to chamber, one to bypass to the exhaust), similar to Kobayashi’s exhaust bypassing 23-3/4 that can also be the first/second FCs and of which a third/duplicated bypass valve would also be included as part of the duplicated gas lines associated with each zone in the showerhead, as mentioned in claim 1, and since each have inlet/outlet with the inlet being connected to separate pairs of outlets from 14-1, 2, fig. 1. It would be obvious to those skilled in the art at the time of invention to modify Kobayashi to provide an alternate to two-way valves [24] that allow exhaust bypassing. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YUECHUAN YU whose telephone number is (571)272-7190. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5. 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 at 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 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. /YUECHUAN YU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/238,810 Page 2 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/238,810 Page 3 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/238,810 Page 4 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/238,810 Page 5 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/238,810 Page 6 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/238,810 Page 7 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/238,810 Page 8 Art Unit: 1718 Application/Control Number: 18/238,810 Page 9 Art Unit: 1718