DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Status of Claims
3. This action is in response to Applicant’s RCE dated 10/09/2026.
4. Claims 1-4 and 6-20 are currently pending.
5. Claims 1, 10, and 15 have been amended.
6. Claim 5 has been cancelled.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
7. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 09/17/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, 10-11, 14-16, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al (US 2021/0032750) in view of Tan et al (US 2018/0233326).
Regarding claim 1:
Wu teaches a reaction chamber (process chamber, 10) [fig 1 & 0019], comprising: an interior space (interior of 10) defined by a sidewall (sidewall of 10), a bottom panel (bottom wall of 10) coupled to the sidewall (sidewall of 10), and a showerhead (showerhead, 62) arranged opposite the bottom panel (bottom wall of 10) and coupled to the sidewall (sidewall of 10), wherein the sidewall (sidewall of 10) comprises an interior-facing surface (interior surface of sidewall of 10) that forms a circular shape having a first circumference (see fig 1) [fig 1 & 0019, 0029]; a spacer plate (plate supporting 23) integrated in the sidewall (sidewall of 10), and comprising a lip (interior extending portion of plate supporting 23) that extends outwards from the sidewall and into the interior space (interior of 10), and extends along the entire first circumference of the interior-facing surface of the sidewall (see fig 1) [fig 1 & 0021]; and a flow control ring (flow control ring, 23) positioned in direct contact with the spacer plate (plate supporting 23), wherein the flow control ring (23) extends along an entire outer edge of the spacer plate (plate supporting 23) [fig 1 & 0021].
Wu does not specifically disclose a spacer plate comprising a heating element.
Tan teaches a spacer plate (spacer, 212) comprising a heating element (heating element, 216) [fig 1-2C & 0029].
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify the spacer plate of Verbaas to comprise a heating element, as in Tan, to maintain the sidewall of the spacer at an optimal thermal condition thereby resulting in minimizing stress and peel off of depositions, improving plasma flow contours, and enhancing particle performance [Tan – 0022].
The claim limitations “wherein the flow control ring is configured to conduct heat from the heating element to heat the interior space” are functional limitations and do not impart any additional structure. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Since the structure of the prior art teaches all structural limitations of the claim, the same is considered capable of meeting the functional limitations. Where the claimed and prior art apparatus are identical or substantially identical in structure, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
Regarding claim 2:
Modified Wu teaches the heating element (216) is embedded within the spacer plate (embedded in the groove 214 of 212) [Tan – fig 1-2C & 0029].
Regarding claims 3-4:
Wu teaches the flow control ring (23) extends outwards from the spacer plate (plate supporting 23) and into the interior space (interior of 10) [fig 1 & 0021]; and wherein the flow control ring (23) has a circumference that is less than (see fig 1) the circumference of the spacer plate (plate supporting 23) [fig 1 & 0021].
Regarding claim 6:
Modified Wu teaches the heating element (216) comprises a resistive heating element (resistor coil) [Tan - fig 1-2C & 0049].
Regarding claim 7:
Modified Wu teaches the heating element (216) is a single element (coil) that extends along the entire circumference of the spacer plate (212) [Tan - fig 1, 2A-2C & 0049].
Regarding claim 10:
Wu teaches a reaction chamber (process chamber, 10) [fig 1 & 0019], comprising: an interior space (interior of 10) defined by a sidewall (sidewall of 10), a bottom panel (bottom wall of 10) coupled to the sidewall (sidewall of 10), and a showerhead (showerhead, 62) arranged opposite the bottom panel (bottom wall of 10) and coupled to the sidewall (sidewall of 10), wherein the sidewall (sidewall of 10) comprises an interior-facing surface (interior surface of sidewall of 10) that forms a circular shape having a first circumference (see fig 1) [fig 1 & 0019, 0029]; a spacer plate (plate supporting 23) extending from the interior-facing surface of the sidewall (interior surface of sidewall of 10) into the interior space (interior of 10) and having a second circumference (see fig 1) [fig 1 & 0021]; and a flow control ring (flow control ring, 23) positioned in direct contact with the spacer plate (plate supporting 23), wherein the flow control ring (23) extends along an entire outer edge of the spacer plate (plate supporting 23) and has a third circumference that is less than the second circumference (circumference of 23 is less than the circumference of the plate supporting 23) [fig 1 & 0021].
Verbaas does not specifically disclose a heating element embedded within the spacer plate.
Tan teaches a heating element (heating element, 216) embedded within the spacer plate (embedded in the groove 214 of 212) [fig 1-2C & 0029].
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify the spacer plate of Verbaas to comprise a heating element embedded therein, as in Tan, to maintain the sidewall of the spacer at an optimal thermal condition thereby resulting in minimizing stress and peel off of depositions, improving plasma flow contours, and enhancing particle performance [Tan – 0022].
The claim limitations “wherein the flow control ring is configured to conduct heat from the heating element to heat the interior space” are functional limitations and do not impart any additional structure. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Since the structure of the prior art teaches all structural limitations of the claim, the same is considered capable of meeting the functional limitations. Where the claimed and prior art apparatus are identical or substantially identical in structure, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
Regarding claim 11:
Modified Wu teaches the heating element (216) is a single element (coil) that extends along the entire circumference of the spacer plate (212) [Tan - fig 1, 2A-2C & 0049].
Regarding claim 14:
Modified Wu teaches the heating element (216) comprises a resistive heating element (resistor coil) [Tan - fig 1-2C & 0049].
Regarding claim 15:
Wu teaches a system (deposition apparatus, 1) [fig 1 & 0017], comprising: a reaction chamber (process chamber, 10) comprising an interior space (interior of 10) defined by: a sidewall (sidewall of 10) comprising an interior-facing surface (interior surface of sidewall of 10) that forms a circular shape having a first circumference (see fig 1) [fig 1 & 0019]; a bottom panel (bottom wall of 10) coupled to the sidewall (sidewall of 10) [fig 1 & 0019]; and a showerhead (showerhead, 62) arranged opposite the bottom panel (bottom wall of 10) and coupled to the sidewall (sidewall of 10) [fig 1 & 0029]; a spacer plate (plate supporting 23) extending from the interior-facing surface of the sidewall (interior surface of sidewall of 10) into the interior space (interior of 10), wherein the spacer plate (plate supporting 23) extends along the entire first circumference of the interior-facing surface of the sidewall (interior surface of sidewall of 10) [fig 1 & 0021]; a flow control ring (flow control ring, 23) positioned in direct contact with the spacer plate (plate supporting 23), wherein the flow control ring (23) extends from an outer edge of the spacer plate into the interior space and has a second circumference (see fig 1) [fig 1 & 0021]; a susceptor (21) disposed in the interior space (interior of 10) and adjacent to the flow control ring (23), the susceptor (21) comprising a top surface (top surface of 21) [fig 1 & 0020-0021]; and a cap (heater cap, 22) disposed on and entirely covering the top surface of the susceptor (top surface of 21), wherein the cap (22) is adjacent to and spaced apart from the flow control ring (23) [fig 1 & 0020-0021].
Wu does not specifically disclose a heating element embedded within the spacer plate.
Tan teaches a heating element (heating element, 216) embedded within the spacer plate (embedded in the groove 214 of 212) [fig 1-2C & 0029].
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify the spacer plate of Verbaas to comprise a heating element embedded therein, as in Tan, to maintain the sidewall of the spacer at an optimal thermal condition thereby resulting in minimizing stress and peel off of depositions, improving plasma flow contours, and enhancing particle performance [Tan – 0022].
The claim limitations “wherein the flow control ring is configured to conduct heat from the heating element to heat the cap” are functional limitations and do not impart any additional structure. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Since the structure of the prior art teaches all structural limitations of the claim, the same is considered capable of meeting the functional limitations. Where the claimed and prior art apparatus are identical or substantially identical in structure, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
Regarding claim 16:
Modified Wu teaches the heating element (216) is a single element (coil) that extends along the entire first circumference (see fig 2A-2C) [Tan - fig 1, 2A-2C & 0049].
Regarding claim 19:
Wu teaches the second circumference of the flow control ring is less than the first circumference of the sidewall (circumference of 23 is less than the circumference of sidewall of 10) [fig 1 & 0021].
Regarding claim 20:
Modified Wu teaches the heating element (216) comprises a resistive heating element (resistor coil) [Tan - fig 1-2C & 0049].
11. Claim(s) 8-9, 12-13, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al (US 2021/0032750) in view of Tan et al (US 2018/0233326) as applied to claims 1-4, 6-7, 10-11, 14-16, and 19-20 above, and further in view of Fodor et al (US 8,444,926).
The limitations of claims 1-4, 6-7, 10-11, 14-16, and 19-20 have been set forth above.
Regarding claims 8-9:
Modified Wu does not specifically disclose the heating element comprises a plurality of heating elements, wherein the heating elements are spaced equidistant from each other; and wherein each heating element is configured to be independently controlled relative to the other heating elements.
Fodor teaches a heating element comprises a plurality of heating elements (plurality of heating elements, 402), wherein the heating elements (402) are spaced equidistant from each other (see fig 4A) [fig 4A-4B & col 5, lines 44-60]; and wherein each heating element is configured to be independently controlled relative to the other heating elements (each heating element 402 may be individually controlled) [fig 4A-4B & col 5, lines 44-60].
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify the heating element of modified Wu to comprise a plurality of heating elements, as in Fodor, to produce a predetermined temperature profile to compensate for areas of increased heat transfer [Fodor - col 5, lines 44-60].
Regarding claims 12-13:
Modified Wu does not specifically disclose the heating element comprises a plurality of heating elements, wherein the heating elements are spaced equidistant from each other; and wherein each heating element is configured to be independently controlled relative to the other heating elements.
Fodor teaches a heating element comprises a plurality of heating elements (plurality of heating elements, 402), wherein the heating elements (402) are spaced equidistant from each other (see fig 4A) [fig 4A-4B & col 5, lines 44-60]; and wherein each heating element is configured to be independently controlled relative to the other heating elements (each heating element 402 may be individually controlled) [fig 4A-4B & col 5, lines 44-60].
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify the heating element of modified Wu to comprise a plurality of heating elements, as in Fodor, to produce a predetermined temperature profile to compensate for areas of increased heat transfer [Fodor - col 5, lines 44-60].
Regarding claims 17-18:
Modified Wu does not specifically disclose the heating element comprises a plurality of heating elements, wherein the heating elements are spaced equidistant from each other; and wherein each heating element is configured to be independently controlled relative to the other heating elements.
Fodor teaches a heating element comprises a plurality of heating elements (plurality of heating elements, 402), wherein the heating elements (402) are spaced equidistant from each other (see fig 4A) [fig 4A-4B & col 5, lines 44-60]; and wherein each heating element is configured to be independently controlled relative to the other heating elements (each heating element 402 may be individually controlled) [fig 4A-4B & col 5, lines 44-60].
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify the heating element of modified Wu to comprise a plurality of heating elements, as in Fodor, to produce a predetermined temperature profile to compensate for areas of increased heat transfer [Fodor - col 5, lines 44-60].
Response to Arguments
12. Applicant's arguments, see Remarks, filed 09/17/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim(s) 1-4 and 6-20 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the combination of references being used in the current rejection.
However, examiner would like to note that applicant’s assertion that quartz is a thermal insulator not configured to conduct heat flies in the face of basic thermodynamics. No material is a perfect insulator. If quartz glass is placed in a 300̊ F oven for an hour, even a small child would know not to touch it.
Additionally, applicant’s assertion that implementing the heating elements of Tan into the spacer of Verbaas would not achieve the benefits disclosed in Tan, so one skilled in the art would have no reason to combine the teachings is baseless speculation and is NOT true. As evidentiary support, applicant may refer to Vahedi et al (US 2007/0034604) which discloses:
“[0046] In another embodiment, the movable uniformity ring is heated to provide a uniform temperature throughout the etching process and to reduce the amount of polymer build up on the surfaces of the uniformity ring. Generally, plasma process deposition is related to surface temperature. That is, the cooler the temperature, the greater the deposition that must be cleaned. Therefore, the movable uniformity ring is preferably configured to be hot enough to prevent polymer deposition on the side walls of the uniformity ring.
[0047] For example, the movable uniformity ring may be heated by conduction or radiation. This may be implemented by heating coils (e.g., electrically), heating lamps, fluid passages, and the like, inside or outside the uniformity ring. In another embodiment, the temperature of the movable uniformity ring may be automatically controlled. For example, when the plasma is charged, the heat inside the chamber generally rises, and therefore the controller is designed to reduce heater power in order to maintain the proper temperature. Correspondingly, heat is generated by the heater when there is no plasma.”
This is the same reason set forth in every office action of record as to why it would be obvious to modify a spacer plate to include the heater of Tan. Specifically, as set forth on page 11 of the last office action: “Specifically, maintaining the spacer plate/flow control ring at an elevated temperature prevents unwanted deposition on the spacer plate/flow control ring thereby "minimizing stress and peel off of depositions, improving plasma flow contours, and enhancing particle performance” [Tan - 0022].”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN R KENDALL whose telephone number is (571)272-5081. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thurs 9-5 EST.
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, William F Kraig can be reached at (571)272-8660. 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.
/Benjamin Kendall/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
