DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/01/026 was filed after the mailing date of the non-final on 04/16/2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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, 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(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moro et al. (US 8,748,780) in view of Hwang et al. (KR 1020210011837) [provided in IDS].
Regarding claim 1, Moro et al. discloses “a wafer processing apparatus” (abstract and fig.10) comprising:
“a plate” (61 and 81) having “a plurality of support pins” (81) configured such that “a wafer” (fig.9, item W) is mounted on “the plurality of support pins” (81) and “a plurality of vacuum ports” (annotated fig.10) positioned between “the plurality of support pins” (81. At least the most outer pins 81);
“a heater” (64) “configured to heat the plate” (61);
“a flow regulator” (73 includes 71a-c and 85a-c) configured to provide “a vacuum pressure for fixing the wafer to the plurality of vacuum ports” (col.9 at lines 59-67, i.e., a vacuum pump via suction holes … thereby serving as suction region. Suction apparatus 86.), and “configured to adjust a flow rate of a fluid flowing into the plurality of vacuum ports to be a target flow rate” (col.13-14, i.e., The flow rate controllers 71a, 71b, 71c control the amounts of air suctioned from the gap regions 80a, 80b, 80c, respectively, by the suction apparatus 86. By the way, the valves 85a, 85b, 85c and the flow rate controllers 71a, 71b, 71c constitute a flow rate controlling portion 73 … The program 14 includes a suction amount controlling program 14a that causes the flow rate controlling portion 73 to control the amount of the air suctioned by the suction apparatus 86 in accordance with the warpage information. This suggests a closed loop control that actively controlling to a target flow rate based on the warpage information); and
“a chuck controller” (fig.10, 10b) “configured to control the target flow rate of the fluid by controlling the flow regulator” (The program 14 includes a suction amount controlling program 14a that causes the flow rate controlling portion 73 to control the amount of the air suctioned by the suction apparatus 86 in accordance with the warpage information. This suggest actively controlling to a target flow rate based on the warpage information), wherein “the chuck controller is configured to generate a flow control signal for reducing the target flow rate of the fluid” (col.13-14, i.e., The flow rate controllers 71a, 71b, 71c control the amounts of air suctioned from the gap regions 80a, 80b, 80c, respectively, by the suction apparatus 86. By the way, the valves 85a, 85b, 85c and the flow rate controllers 71a, 71b, 71c constitute a flow rate controlling portion 73. The program 14 includes a suction amount controlling program 14a that causes the flow rate controlling portion 73 to control the amount of the air suctioned by the suction apparatus 86 in accordance with the warpage information. If the controller adjusts flow rate based on warpage, the flow rate cannot be fixed, it must be able to decrease from its target value when warpage condition requires less force or suction) and “send the flow control signal to the flow regulator during a heating process of the wafer” (col.13-14, i.e., The substrate processing apparatus 4 includes a controlling portion 10b that has the CPU 13 and a program 14. The program 14 includes a suction amount controlling program 14a that causes the flow rate controlling portion 73 to control the amount of the air suctioned by the suction apparatus 86 in accordance with the warpage information. The suction amounts from corresponding gap regions 80a, 80b, 80c are controlled depending on the wafer warpage directions and/or the degree of warpage. With such a configuration, the wafer W can be heated more uniformly. The suction amount based on degree of warpage in a configuration when wafer can be heated more uniformly. This suggest that the suction is adjusted based on warpage and the purpose is to achieve more uniform heating of wafer so that warpage changes as the wafer is being heated).
Moro et al. is silent regarding wherein the chuck controller is configured to control the target flow rate of the fluid set in the flow regulator to be a first flow rate at a start of the heating process of the wafer, and to control the target flow rate of the fluid set in the flow regulator to be a second flow rate during the heating process of the wafer, the second flow rate being less than the first flow rate.
Hwang et al. teaches “the chuck controller” (fig.1A, 140) is configured to “control the target flow rate of the fluid set in the flow regulator to be a first flow rate at a start of the heating process of the wafer, and to control the target flow rate of the fluid set in the flow regulator to be a second flow rate during the heating process of the wafer, the second flow rate being less than the first flow rate” ([0076], i.e., Next, referring to FIGS. 1a and FIGS. 3, the air flow rate for chucking the wafer (W) can be controlled based on the outputs of the heating device (117) in P140. and fig.3, P140 teaches regulate vacuum pressure of vacuum ports based on power outputs of heating device. This suggest the higher vacuum pressure when power output is higher and vacuum pressure is lower when power output is lower. Also see [0063] and Fig.4 shows the dash and dotted lines represent the power supply. As suggested above, fig.4 shows higher power output during initial wafer heating right after t1 for a short period of time would result higher vacuum pressure and during heating process of wafer after the period of time when power returns to a lower level prior to t2 would result lower vacuum pressure). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Moro et al. with Hwang et al., by adding Hwang’s control algorithm to Moro et al.’s controller, to allow uniformly controlling the temperature of the entire wafer (para.0003) as taught by Hwang et al.
Regarding claim 2, modified Moro et al. discloses “the plate is divided into a central area and an edge area surrounding the central area, and the plurality of vacuum ports are located in the edge area of the plate” (Moro et al., annotated fig.10)
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moro et al. (US 8,748,780) in view of Hwang et al. (KR 1020210011837) [provided in IDS] as applied in claims 1-2 above, and further in view of Akarsuka et al. (US 20110062144 A1)
Regarding claim 3, Moro et al. discloses “the edge area” (annotated fig.10) is a region ranging from “an outer end of the central area to an outer end of the plate” (annotated fig.10. fig.7A-B shows example of the plate).
Moro et al. is silent regarding the central area is a circular region having a radius of about 80 mm to about 140 mm from a central point of an upper surface of the plate.
Akarsuka et al. teaches “the central area is a circular region having a radius of about 80 mm to about 140 mm from a central point of an upper surface of the plate” ([0041], i.e., a circular region having a diameter R2 (60 to 150 mm) in the ceramic plate 20). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Moro et al. with Akarsuka et al., to provide a suitable size of support plate for a wafer.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moro et al. (US 8,748,780) in view of Hwang et al. (KR 1020210011837) [provided in IDS] as applied in claims 1-2 above, and further in view of Yashima et al. (US 2013/0072034).
Regarding claim 4, Moro et al. discloses the flow control signal reduces the target flow rate of the fluid set in the flow regulator” (col.13-14, i.e., The flow rate controllers 71a, 71b, 71c control the amounts of air suctioned from the gap regions 80a, 80b, 80c, respectively, by the suction apparatus 86. By the way, the valves 85a, 85b, 85c and the flow rate controllers 71a, 71b, 71c constitute a flow rate controlling portion 73. The program 14 includes a suction amount controlling program 14a that causes the flow rate controlling portion 73 to control the amount of the air suctioned by the suction apparatus 86 in accordance with the warpage information. If the controller adjusts flow rate based on warpage, the flow rate cannot be fixed, it must be able to decrease from its target value when warpage condition requires less force or suction)
Moro et al. is silent regarding flow rate of the fluid set in the flow regulator as a step function.
Yashima et al. teaches “flow rate of the fluid set in the flow regulator as a step function” ([0075], i.e., When the valve 153 is opened/closed, the gas is supplied or shut off from the gas supplying pipe 152 into the process chamber 110. The flow rate of gas is regulated by the flow rate control device 154. Examiner noted that opened and closed valve (shut off) considered a step function because valve acts as binary control where fully open and fully closed creating an instantaneous shift in behavior). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Moro et al. with Yashima, by adding Yashima et al.’s flow control algorithm to Moro et al.’s valve controller, to control gas supply for cooling the wafer (para.0075) as taught by Yashima et al.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moro et al. (US 8,748,780) in view of Hwang et al. (KR 1020210011837) [provided in IDS] as applied in claims 1-2 above, and further in view of Kulp (US 8,669,497).
Regarding claim 11, Moro et al. discloses all the features of claim limitations as set forth above except for a distance sensor configured to measure a separation distance between a lower surface of the wafer and an upper surface of the plate.
Kulp teaches “a distance sensor” (42)” configured to measure a separation distance between a lower surface of the wafer and an upper surface of the plate” (col.2 at lines 10-45, i.e., Different heating elements in the hotplate are controlled to compensate for the differences in distances from the hotplate surface to the surface of the wafer, as measured in the inline metrology unit. Col.5 at lines 10-32, i.e., The proximity sensors 42 are configured to determine the distances from a reference plane to the bottom surface 70b of the semiconductor wafer 70). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Moro et al. with Kulp, by adding Kulp’s distance sensor to Moro et al.’s device, to provide uniform heating for the wafer.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moro et al. (US 8,748,780) in view of Hwang et al. (KR 1020210011837) [provided in IDS] and Yamagishi (US 2012/0328780).
Regarding claim 14, Moro et al. discloses “a wafer processing apparatus” (abstract and fig.10) comprising:
“a plate” (61 and 81) having “a plurality of support pins” (81) configured such that “a wafer” (fig.9, item W) is mounted on “the plurality of support pins” (81) and “a plurality of vacuum ports” (annotated fig.10) positioned between “the plurality of support pins” (81. At least the most outer pins 81);
“a heater” (64) “configured to heat the plate” (61);
“a flow regulator” (73 includes 71a-c and 85a-c) configured to provide “a vacuum pressure for fixing the wafer to the plurality of vacuum ports” (col.9 at lines 59-67, i.e., a vacuum pump via suction holes … thereby serving as suction region. Suction apparatus 86.), and “configured to adjust a flow rate of a fluid flowing into the plurality of vacuum ports to be a target flow rate” (col.13-14, i.e., The flow rate controllers 71a, 71b, 71c control the amounts of air suctioned from the gap regions 80a, 80b, 80c, respectively, by the suction apparatus 86. By the way, the valves 85a, 85b, 85c and the flow rate controllers 71a, 71b, 71c constitute a flow rate controlling portion 73 … The program 14 includes a suction amount controlling program 14a that causes the flow rate controlling portion 73 to control the amount of the air suctioned by the suction apparatus 86 in accordance with the warpage information. This suggests a closed loop control that actively controlling to a target flow rate based on the warpage information); and
“a pressure sensor” (plural pressure sensors 88 were provided on the thermal plates 61, 90 in order to measure pressure (suction amount) applied onto the wafer W kept on the thermal plates 61, 90 by suction)measure pressure (suction amount))
“a chuck controller” (fig.10, 10b) “configured to control the target flow rate of the fluid by controlling the flow regulator” (The program 14 includes a suction amount controlling program 14a that causes the flow rate controlling portion 73 to control the amount of the air suctioned by the suction apparatus 86 in accordance with the warpage information. This suggest actively controlling to a target flow rate based on the warpage information), wherein “the chuck controller is configured to generate a flow control signal for reducing the target flow rate of the fluid” (col.13-14, i.e., The flow rate controllers 71a, 71b, 71c control the amounts of air suctioned from the gap regions 80a, 80b, 80c, respectively, by the suction apparatus 86. By the way, the valves 85a, 85b, 85c and the flow rate controllers 71a, 71b, 71c constitute a flow rate controlling portion 73. The program 14 includes a suction amount controlling program 14a that causes the flow rate controlling portion 73 to control the amount of the air suctioned by the suction apparatus 86 in accordance with the warpage information. If the controller adjusts flow rate based on warpage, the flow rate cannot be fixed, it must be able to decrease from its target value when warpage condition requires less force or suction) and “send the flow control signal to the flow regulator during a heating process of the wafer” (col.13-14, i.e., The substrate processing apparatus 4 includes a controlling portion 10b that has the CPU 13 and a program 14. The program 14 includes a suction amount controlling program 14a that causes the flow rate controlling portion 73 to control the amount of the air suctioned by the suction apparatus 86 in accordance with the warpage information. The suction amounts from corresponding gap regions 80a, 80b, 80c are controlled depending on the wafer warpage directions and/or the degree of warpage. With such a configuration, the wafer W can be heated more uniformly. The suction amount based on degree of warpage in a configuration when wafer can be heated more uniformly. This suggest that the suction is adjusted based on warpage and the purpose is to achieve more uniform heating of wafer so that warpage changes as the wafer is being heated).
Moro et al. is silent regarding a pressure sensor arranged in the flow regulator.
Yamagishi teaches “a pressure sensor” ("PT" refers to pressure transducer) arranged in “the flow regulator” (a gas box 27). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Moro et al. with Yamagishi, by adding Yamagishi’s pressure transducer, to monitor control and analyze pressure in real-time, to ensure operational efficiency and preventing dangerous overpressure scenarios.
Moro et al. is silent regarding wherein the chuck controller is configured to control the target flow rate of the fluid set in the flow regulator to be a first flow rate at a start of the heating process of the wafer, and to control the target flow rate of the fluid set in the flow regulator to be a second flow rate during the heating process of the wafer, the second flow rate being less than the first flow rate.
Hwang et al. teaches “the chuck controller” (fig.1A, 140) is configured to “control the target flow rate of the fluid set in the flow regulator to be a first flow rate at a start of the heating process of the wafer, and to control the target flow rate of the fluid set in the flow regulator to be a second flow rate during the heating process of the wafer, the second flow rate being less than the first flow rate” ([0076], i.e., Next, referring to FIGS. 1a and FIGS. 3, the air flow rate for chucking the wafer (W) can be controlled based on the outputs of the heating device (117) in P140. and fig.3, P140 teaches regulate vacuum pressure of vacuum ports based on power outputs of heating device. This suggest the higher vacuum pressure when power output is higher and vacuum pressure is lower when power output is lower. Also see [0063] and Fig.4 shows the dash and dotted lines represent the power supply. As suggested above, fig.4 shows higher power output during initial wafer heating right after t1 for a short period of time would result higher vacuum pressure and during heating process of wafer after the period of time when power returns to a lower level prior to t2 would result lower vacuum pressure). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Moro et al. with Hwang et al., by adding Hwang’s control algorithm to Moro et al.’s controller, to allow uniformly controlling the temperature of the entire wafer (para.0003) as taught by Hwang et al.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moro et al. (US 8,748,780) in view of Hwang et al. (KR 1020210011837) [provided in IDS] and Yamagishi (US 2012/0328780) as applied in claim 14 above, and further in view of Shimomura et al. (US 20140042153).
Regarding claim 15, Moro et al. discloses “the flow control signal col.13-14, i.e., The flow rate controllers 71a, 71b, 71c control the amounts of air suctioned from the gap regions 80a, 80b, 80c, respectively, by the suction apparatus 86. By the way, the valves 85a, 85b, 85c and the flow rate controllers 71a, 71b, 71c constitute a flow rate controlling portion 73 … The program 14 includes a suction amount controlling program 14a that causes the flow rate controlling portion 73 to control the amount of the air suctioned by the suction apparatus 86 in accordance with the warpage information. This suggests a closed loop control that actively controlling to a target flow rate based on the warpage information).
However, Moro et al. is silent regarding gradually reduces the flow rate of the fluid.
Shimomura et al. teaches “gradually reduces the flow rate of the fluid” ([0041] Next, the flow rate of N.sub.2 gas in the chamber 11 is stabilized by gradually decreasing the flow rate of N.sub.2 gas introduced from the gas introducing mechanisms 14 (step S23). This suggest that flow introducing mechanism that is capable of act as a valve to gradually reduces the flow rate). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Moro et al. with Shimomura et al., by utilizing Shimomura control mechanism to slowing reduce flow rate Moro et al.’s flow rate of the fluid, to protect delicate wafer substrate and prevents sudden vacuum pressure changes which can lead to wafer breakage or damage.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moro et al. (US 8,748,780) in view of Hwang et al. (KR 1020210011837) [provided in IDS] and Yamagishi (US 2012/0328780) as applied in claim 14 above, and further in view of Kulp (US 8,669,497).
Regarding claim 17, modified Moro et al. discloses all the features of claim limitations as set forth above except for a distance sensor configured to measure a separation distance between a lower surface of the wafer and an upper surface of the plate.
Kulp teaches “a distance sensor” (42)” configured to measure a separation distance between a lower surface of the wafer and an upper surface of the plate” (col.2 at lines 10-45, i.e., Different heating elements in the hotplate are controlled to compensate for the differences in distances from the hotplate surface to the surface of the wafer, as measured in the inline metrology unit. Col.5 at lines 10-32, i.e., The proximity sensors 42 are configured to determine the distances from a reference plane to the bottom surface 70b of the semiconductor wafer 70). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Moro et al. with Kulp, by adding Kulp’s distance sensor to Moro et al.’s device, to provide uniform heating for the wafer.
PNG
media_image1.png
1142
1456
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-10, 12-13, 16, 18-20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 06/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues “35 USC 112b … paragraph [0046] as originally filed states terms such as about or approximately … a range from about 0.1 to about 1 may encompass a range such as 0%-5%” on pages 11-12 of remark.
In response, 35 USC 112b has been withdrawn because paragraph [0046] provides definition with respect to “about” or “approximately”.
Applicant argues “35 USC 102/103 …” on page 13 of remark.
In response, the amendment to claims overcome prior rejections. However, the IDS filed on 05/10/2026 provide a reference that teaches the amended portions in the independent claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's submission of an information disclosure statement under 37 CFR 1.97(c) with the timing fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(p) on 05/01/2026 prompted the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 609.04(b). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY CHOU whose telephone number is (571)270-7107. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-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, Edward Landrum can be reached at (571) 272-5567. 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.
/JIMMY CHOU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights