Detailed Correspondence
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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 04/28/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicants’ submission, filed on 04/28/2026, addressing rejection of claims 1-10, 13-23, and 26-38 from the final office action (01/28/2026), by amending claims 1-5, 7-10, 13, 15-18, 20-23, 26-27, 30-33, and 35-37, cancelling claims 6, 19, and 34, and adding new claims 41-43 is entered and will be addressed below.
Election/Restrictions
No claims are currently withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claim 23 is objected to because of the following informalities: “wherein in the purge ring, the plurality of exit apertures is positioned on a bottom surface of the purge ring” should be “wherein in the purge ring, the plurality of exit apertures are positioned on a bottom surface of the purge ring”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretations
The newly added limitation “each channel” in various claims, this is considered as “each channel of the plurality of channels”.
The “each lower passageway surface is offset from the upper surface by a first height in a direction parallel to the center axis … each channel is circumferentially interposed between two adjacent passageways and partially defined by the upper surface and a lower channel surface“ of independent claims 1, 13, and 26 is considered as “each lower passageway surface is offset from the upper surface of the distribution volume by a first height in a direction parallel to the center axis … each channel is circumferentially interposed between two adjacent passageways and partially defined by the upper surface of the distribution volume and a lower channel surface“.
The ”wherein the purge ring is configured to sit below the substrate” of claims 14 and 29 requires the location of sitting is below the substrate, the top of the purge ring may or may not be below the substrate.
Furthermore, various figures show the passageways 430 seem to be a block that hinders the flow, which contradicts the dictionary meaning of passageways, clarification for the record is requested.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
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 1-5, 7-10, 13-18, 20-23, 26-33, 35-38, 41-43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-10, 13-18, 20-23, 26-33, 35-38, 41-43 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.
The newly added limitations “each passageway is partially defined by the upper surface of the distribution volume and a lower passageway surface,
each lower passageway surface is offset from the upper surface by a first height in a direction parallel to the center axis,
each channel is circumferentially interposed between two adjacent passageways and partially defined by the upper surface and a lower channel surface, and
each lower channel surface is offset from the upper surface by a second height, greater than the first height, in the direction parallel to the center axis” of each independent claims 1, 13, and 26 does not have support in Applicants’ Specification.
The claimed terms are mapped into the illustration below.
PNG
media_image1.png
118
278
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
658
900
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First
height)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Lower
Passage
surface)][AltContent: textbox (Upper
surface
of the
distribution
volume)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Lower
Channel
surface)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (second
height)][AltContent: rect][AltContent: arc]
Applicants’ Specification indicates “A space between the surface 482 and the top surface 481 provides for fluid flow”, therefore, the difference in height should be between the lower surface of the distribution volume and the upper surface of the passageways, and between the lower surface of the distribution volume and the upper surface of the channels.
Claims 1, 13, and 26 will be examined inclusive the passageways, either porous or solid, partially block the channels in height direction parallel to the center axis.
The limitation “wherein the exit apertures are non-planar with the distribution volume” of the new claim 41 is not clear. It is not clear whether it compares a plane of the collection of all exit apertures or each of the plurality of apertures have a plane. Furthermore, each of the plurality of apertures is three dimensional (for example, Fig. 6C, aperture 460P includes 520P-1) and the distribution volume is also a three dimensional, it is not clear which plane of the 3-D object are being compared with to be “non-planar”. Or is it the same as the limitation of claim 10?
Claim 41 will be examined inclusive all of the above interpretations.
Dependent claims 2-5, 7-10, 14-18, 20-23, 25-33, 35-38, 41-43 are also rejected under USC 112(b) at least due to dependency to rejected claims 1, 13, and 26, respectively.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 5, 7-9, 13-14, 18, 20-22, and 41 are rejected under under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 20190362940, from IDS, hereafter ‘940), in view of Cho et al. (US 20170352568, hereafter ‘568).
‘940 teaches all limitations of:
Claim 13: Referring now to FIGS. 5A and 5B, an example substrate support 500 having a substrate 504 arranged thereon is shown. The substrate support 500 includes a base or pedestal having an inner portion 508 and an outer portion 512. The outer portion includes an edge ring 516 (Figs. 5A-5B, [0040], including the claimed “A pedestal assembly of a process chamber, the pedestal assembly comprising: a pedestal for supporting a substrate; a purge ring configured to be placed about a periphery of the pedestal, the purge ring including”):
the edge ring 516 may define a plenum 544 arranged to receive, via one or more conduits 548, gases from gas source(s) 552 ([0042], 3rd sentence, including the claimed “a supply port configured to receive a gas; an outer channel fluidically connected to the supply port”);
the edge ring 516 includes edge ring nozzles 540. The edge ring nozzles 540 may be provided ([0042], the inner portion of the nozzles, or jetting holes is the claimed “an outlet network positioned proximate to an inner circumference of the purge ring and fluidically connected to the outer channel via a distribution volume” and as shown in Fig. 5B; each of the rest of the ring nozzle is considered a flow channel, reads into the claimed “the distribution volume is partially defined by an upper surface, comprising a plurality of channels, and fluidically interposed between the outer channel and the outlet network”).
‘940 does not teach the other limitations of:
Claim 13: (the distribution volume is partially defined by an upper surface, comprising) a plurality of passageways and (a plurality of channels, and fluidically interposed between the outer channel and the outlet network),
the passageways and the channels are spaced around a center axis of the purge ring,
each passageway is partially defined by the upper surface of the distribution volume and a lower passageway surface,
each lower passageway surface is offset from the upper surface by a first height in a direction parallel to the center axis,
each channel is circumferentially interposed between two adjacent passageways and partially defined by the upper surface and a lower channel surface, and
each lower channel surface is offset from the upper surface by a second height, greater than the first height, in the direction parallel to the center axis.
‘568 is analogous art in the field of HIGH POWER ELECTROSTATIC CHUCK WITH APERTURE-REDUCING PLUG IN A GAS HOLE (title), high power plasma processing (abstract, same as ‘940, [0004]), for semiconductor and micromechanical processing ([0002]). ‘568 teaches that FIG. 4 is an enlarged partial cross-sectional side view diagram of the gas hole 213 in the base plate 222 or cooling plate and the top plate 208 … The channel is open to a hole 258 through the cover 260 that feeds the gas into a first porous plug 242 in the cooling channel. The porous plug in the cooling channel conducts the gas into a second porous plug 246 in the puck. The porous plug in the puck couples the gas under pressure into a central hole 250 through the top of the puck toward the wafer back side. If there are more cooling gas holes, then the channel may extend to those holes with corresponding holes in the cover to pass gas through to corresponding porous plugs ([0024]), In the example of FIG. 5, however, the porous plug 242 is replaced with an alumina or other dielectric solid aperture-reducing plug 262. Any other dielectric amorphous, polymer, or other non-porous material may be used including various ceramics. The plug has a central tube 264 to allow the flow of the cooling gas. It may also have additional vertical tubes 266 to the side of the central tube to allow a higher total flow rate. The sizes of the tubes may be selected to suit different temperature and plasma voltage conditions as well as to suit different gas flow rates ([0033]), The holes may have aperture restricting plugs (not shown) as described above that are either solid or porous ([0036], last sentence), The increase in dielectric in the otherwise thermally conducting cooling plate helps to allow for higher external plasma and bias voltages without arcing in the holes of the cooling plate ([0027], 3rd sentence).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have a plug 262 with a center hole 264 of ‘568, to each of the interior of the ring nozzles 540 of ‘940, for the purpose of reducing arcing ([0027], 3rd sentence).
Claim 1 is rejected for substantially the same reason as claim 13 rejection above.
‘940 further teaches the limitations of:
Claim 14: Fig. 5A shows that the outer portion 512, which is where the purge ring 516 sits when it is at lowest position, is below the substrate (includes the claimed “wherein the purge ring is configured to sit below the substrate”).
Claims 8 and 21: the nozzles 540 is an array for an exit flow of the gas (includes the claimed “wherein the outlet network includes an array of exit apertures, each of the exit apertures configured to provide a corresponding portion of an exit flow of the gas“ of claim 8 and “wherein in the purge ring, the outlet network includes a plurality of exit apertures, each of the plurality of exit apertures configured to provide a corresponding portion of an exit flow of the gas” of claim 21).
Claims 9 and 22: Fig. 5B shows the claimed “wherein the exit apertures in the array are distributed symmetrically around the inner circumference of the purge ring“ of claim 9 “wherein in the purge ring, the exit apertures in the plurality of exit apertures are distributed symmetrically around the inner circumference of the purge ring” of claim 22.
Claim 41: “wherein the exit apertures are non-planar with the distribution volume” as various plane of 3-D objects cannot be co-planar, see 112(b) rejection above.
The combination of ‘940 and ‘568 further teaches the limitations of:
Claims 5 and 18: by adopting the porous plug 242 of Fig. 4 of ‘568 as the plug 262 in Fig. 5 of ‘568, to each of the interior of the ring nozzles 540 of ‘940, the combination would have the claimed “wherein each passageway comprises a media that defines the lower passageway surface, and wherein the media is porous“.
Claims 7 and 20: the surface of the porous plug 242 would have increased the surface area and increases fluid resistance, same as Applicants’ ribbed surface (see Specification [0098], reads into the claimed “wherein the surface of the media is ribbed“).
Claims 2-3, 15-16, and 42-43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘940 and ‘568, as being applied to claims 1 and 13 rejection above, in view of Shin 신문우 (KR 100500678, hereafter ‘678) and Kontani et al. (US 20040025786, hereafter ‘786), and/or in view of Kanai et al. (US 4908329, hereafter ‘329).
The combination of ‘940 and ‘568 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 2 and 15: wherein each channel is circumferentially offset from the supply port by a circumferential position, and wherein an arc length of each channel of the purge ring varies as a function of the circumferential position of each respective channel relative to the supply port.
Claims 3 and 16: wherein as a circumferential distance from the supply port increases, the arc length of a respective channel increases.
Claim 42: wherein: a first channel has a first arc length and is positioned at a first circumferential position with respect to the supply port, and
a second channel has a second arc length, greater than the first arc length, and is positioned at a second circumferential position, greater than the first circumferential position, with respect to the supply port.
Claim 43: wherein each passageway is circumferentially offset from the supply port by a circumferential position, and wherein an arc length of each passageway varies as a function of the circumferential position of each respective passageway relative to the supply port.
‘678 is analogous art in the field of Multi-feeding Device For Uniform Thermal Process Of Semiconductor Wafer (title). ‘678 teaches that Referring to FIG. 2, a gas multi-supply apparatus 100 for a uniform thermal process of a semiconductor wafer according to the present invention is shown. As shown, the multi-gas supply apparatus 100 according to the present invention includes a connection block 110 connected to a gas supply port of a chamber, and a ring 120 seated in a circular line shape inside the chamber (lower portion of P3), the ring 120 communicates and is connected to both sides of the connection block 110, and extends in a substantially semi-circular line form to a gas outlet along the circular inner wall of the chamber, and the preheated gas is formed on the inner circumferential surface of the wafer. A plurality of gas supply holes 122 are formed to be supplied to the gas (bridging paragraph between P3-4, Figs. 2-3 shows the gas supply holes 122 are closer, or higher hole density, down stream from the gas supply port 110). It is well-known that hole density increase and hole size increase at equal density have similar effect.
‘786 is analogous art in the field of Substrate Processing Apparatus And Reaction Container (title), a reaction container used in one step of producing process of a semiconductor device for processing a substrate in a reaction chamber, ([0002]), including plasma. ‘678 criticizes that In the above-described conventional gas nozzle 101, since the flow rates and flow velocities of gas injected from the respective gas nozzle holes 103 are different, it is considered that gas can not be supplied to the wafers uniformly (Fig. 14, [0022], last sentence). ‘678 teaches that the gas nozzle 2 shown in FIG. 3A is a pipe having a circular cross section. The gas nozzle holes 4 are straightly arranged in a side surface of the gas nozzle 2 from its substantially uppermost portion to a bottom of the buffer chamber 17 from an upstream side toward a downstream side of gas flow. Opening areas of the gas nozzle holes 4 are increased from the upstream side (lower portion in FIG. 3A) toward the downstream side (upper portion in FIG. 3A) as viewed from the gas introducing opening ([0117]), The buffer chamber 17 shown in FIG. 3B is a pipe having an arc cross section. The buffer chamber holes 3 having the same opening areas are straightly arranged in an end of a curve inner surface of the buffer chamber 17 along the stacking direction of the wafers 7 ([0118]), for the purpose of uniformly supplying gas ([0027]). Note gas nozzle 2 corresponds to the channel and passageways and buffer chamber 17 and holes 3 corresponds to the outlet network.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have recognized the gas non-uniformity because the uniform edge ring nozzles 540 as shown in Fig. 5A-5B of ‘940, as taught by Fig. 14 of ‘786, and to have applied higher density of gas holes downstream of the gas supply port of ‘678 (the limitation of 43) or a larger arc length downstream of the gas supply port, as taught by ‘786, by re-arranging the increased length of gas nozzle holes 4 along the circumferential direction (the limitations of 2-3, 15-16, and 42), for the purpose of uniformly supplying gas, as taught by ‘786 ([0027]). Note placing the increase length of gas nozzle holes has two options, one along the circumferential direction and the other perpendicular to the circumferential direction, a limited choice.
‘329 is analogous art in the field of Process For The Formation Of A Functional Deposited Film Containing Groups II And VI Atoms By Microwave Plasma Chemical Vapor Deposition Process (title), for semiconductor devices (col. 1, line 12). ‘329 teaches that The gas liberation means are disposed so as to surround, the substrate in an annular configuration, and the amount of gases liberated from each of the gas liberation apertures is made uniform, by gradually decreasing the interval of the gas liberation apertures from the side of introducing the gas liberation means toward the final liberation aperture, by gradually enlarging the size of the gas liberation aperture from the side of introducing the gas liberation means toward the final liberation aperture (col. 5, lines 37-46), In the gas liberation ring 201 shown in FIG. 2(a), eight liberation apertures 201a-201d, 201a'-201d' are apertured each at an equal distance, in which the aperture diameter is gradually increased from the liberation apertures 201a, 201a' nearest in the direction of the arrow ([Symbol font/0xAE]) toward the downstream to the apertures 201d, 201d' (col. 12, lines 58-64).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have gradually increased the diameter/width of the nozzle 540 of ‘940 (or the nozzles 212 of ‘296) from inlet side to downstream side of the edge ring 516, as taught by ‘329, for the purpose of uniform gas, as taught by ‘329 (col. 5, line 40). Because the passageway is the complemental portion of the plurality of channels of a ring, the effect of with relationship is opposite to the plurality of channels.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘940 and ‘568, as being applied to claim 13 rejection above, in view of Kim et al. (US 20070087296, hereafter ‘296).
The combination of ‘940 and ‘568 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 17: the purge ring including a reservoir connecting the distribution volume to the outlet network.
‘296 is analogous art in the field of Gas Supply Device And Apparatus For Processing A Substrate (title), A semiconductor manufacturing process ([0005]), The gas supply device 100 may include a plurality of nozzles 112 that may be connected to the first gas supply member 110. Each of the nozzles 112 may extend toward the substrate supported by the stage 12 in the chamber 10 ([0055], Fig. 5, for example). ‘296 teaches that If the gas is more uniformly distributed through the second gas supply member 220 and the first gas supply member 210, the gas may be more uniformly provided onto the substrate, and the substrate may be more uniformly processed by the gas ([0084], 2nd sentence, see illustration below of Fig. 5 for the corresponding components).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have replaced the plenum 544 and nozzle 540 in the edge ring 516 of ‘940 with the gas supply device in Fig. 5 of ‘296, for the purpose of uniformity of gas, as taught by ‘296 ([0084], 2nd sentence).
PNG
media_image5.png
776
790
media_image5.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Outer
channel)][AltContent: oval][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Channels
Including
radial
flow)][AltContent: textbox (Supply
port)][AltContent: textbox (Output
Network
with
Radial
flow)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Passageways
Reduces
flow)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Distribution
volume)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: oval][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Reservoir)]
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘940, ‘568, ‘678, and ‘786 (or ‘940, ‘568, and ‘329), as being applied to claim 3 rejection above, further in view of ‘296.
The combination of ‘940, ‘568, ‘678, and ‘786 (or ‘329) does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 3: further comprising: a reservoir connecting the distribution volume to the outlet network.
‘296 is analogous art as discussed above.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have replaced the plenum 544 and nozzle 540 in the edge ring 516 of ‘940 with the gas supply device in Fig. 5 of ‘296, for the purpose of uniformity of gas, as taught by ‘296 ([0084], 2nd sentence).
Claims 10 and 23, and alternatively claim 41, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘940 and ‘568, as being applied to claims 8 and 21 rejection above, further in view of Hillman (US 6409837, hereafter ‘837).
The combination of ‘940 and ‘568 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 10: wherein the array of exit apertures is positioned on a bottom surface of the purge ring.
Claim 23: wherein in the purge ring, the plurality of exit apertures is positioned on a bottom surface of the purge ring.
‘837 is analogous art in the field of Processing System And Method For Chemical Vapor Deposition (title) including a susceptor 30 (Fig. 1, col. 6, lines 20-21). ‘837 teaches that an edge exclusion ring 110 is positioned in the process space and is coupled to housing 11 to be positioned around the periphery of substrate 16 (col. 11, lines 28-30), Ring 110 includes a gas cavity 116 formed therearound with a passage 118 which directs gas from cavity 116 beneath the ring 110 and toward the outer peripheral edge 112 of the substrate (Fig. 4, col. 11, lines 47-50), to prevent reactant gases from entering into the gap 120 formed between the ring edge 114 and the substrate edge 112 (col. 11, lines 60-61).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have changed the direction of the edge ring nozzle 540 of ‘940 to a direction beneath the ring, as taught by ‘837, for the purpose of preventing reactant gases from entering into the gap formed between the ring edge and the substrate edge, as taught by ‘837 (col. 11, lines 60-61).
Claim 41 is also rejected over ‘940, in view of ‘568 and ‘837 as a different interpretation of the claim (see 112(b) rejection above).
Claims 26, 29, 33, and 35-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘940, in view of ‘568 and Ravi et al. (US 20160002778, hereafter ‘778).
‘940 teaches some limitations of:
Claim 26: The substrate processing system 100 includes a processing chamber 102 that encloses other components of the substrate processing system 100 and contains the RF plasma (Fig. 1, [0023], 3rd sentence, includes the claimed “A process chamber comprising”):
Referring now to FIGS. 5A and 5B, an example substrate support 500 having a substrate 504 arranged thereon is shown. The substrate support 500 includes a base or pedestal having an inner portion 508 and an outer portion 512. The outer portion includes an edge ring 516 (Figs. 5A-5B, [0040], including the claimed “a station including a pedestal assembly, each of the pedestal assemblies including: a pedestal for supporting a substrate; a purge ring configured to be placed about a periphery of the pedestal, the purge ring including”):
the edge ring 516 may define a plenum 544 arranged to receive, via one or more conduits 548, gases from gas source(s) 552 ([0042], 3rd sentence, including the claimed “a supply port configured to receive a gas; an outer channel fluidically connected to the supply port”);
the edge ring 516 includes edge ring nozzles 540. The edge ring nozzles 540 may be provided ([0042], the inner portion of the nozzles, or jetting hole, is the claimed “an outlet network positioned proximate to an inner circumference of the purge ring and fluidically connected to the outer channel via a distribution volume” and as shown in Fig. 5A; each of the rest of the ring nozzle is considered a flow channel, reads into the claimed “a plurality of channels configured to flow of the gas in a radial direction from the outer channel to the outlet network” from the top view, the nozzle 540 includes radial flow; the space between nozzle pair of the edge ring 516 does not allow any flow in between, reads into the claimed “the distribution volume is partially defined by an upper surface, comprising a plurality of passageways and a plurality of channels, and fluidically interposed between the outer channel and the outlet network”);
the upper electrode 104 may include a gas distribution device such as a showerhead 109 that introduces and distributes process gases ([0024], includes the claimed “a gas distribution system for distributing the gas with even gas flow to the pedestal assembly”).
‘940 also teaches the controller might communicate with one or more of other tool circuits or modules, other tool components, cluster tools ([0053]), however, ‘940 does not specifically teaches edge ring of Figs. 5A-5B in multiple chambers of the cluster tool. ‘940 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 26: (26A) a plurality of stations, each of the plurality of stations (including a pedestal assembly),
(26B) wherein: the passageways and the channels are spaced around a center axis of the purge ring,
each passageway is partially defined by the upper surface of the distribution volume and a lower passageway surface,
each lower passageway surface is offset from the upper surface by a first height in a direction parallel to the center axis,
each channel is circumferentially interposed between two adjacent passageways and partially defined by the upper surface and a lower channel surface, and
each lower channel surface is offset from the upper surface by a second height, greater than the first height, in the direction parallel to the center axis
‘778 is analogous art in the field of SUBSTRATE SUPPORT WITH MORE UNIFORM EDGE PURGE (title), semiconductor processing equipment ([0002]), As shown in FIG. 2, a plurality of purge gas channels 204A, 204B may spread from a single inlet 203 in a central portion of the first plate 105 to a plurality of outlets 205 at the periphery of the first plate 105 ([0023], 3rd sentence), The edge ring 402 is spaced apart from the first plate 105 to allow purge gases flowing out of the outlets 205 to flow between the first plate 105 and the edge ring 402 as indicated by the arrows in FIG. 4 ([0029], 3rd sentence). ‘778 teaches that The process chamber may be a standalone process chamber or a part of a cluster tool, such as one of the CENTURA®, PRODUCER®, or ENDURA® cluster tools available from Applied Materials, Inc. of Santa Clara, Calif. ([0016], last sentence).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated Figs. 5A-5B of ‘940 into multiple process chambers of a cluster tool (the limitation of 26A), as taught by ‘778, for the purpose of productivity of cluster tools.
‘568 is analogous art as discussed above.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have a plug 262 with a center hole 264 of ‘568, to each of the interior of the ring nozzles 540 of ‘940 (the limitations of 26B), for the purpose of reducing arcing ([0027], 3rd sentence).
Claims 29, 33, and 35-37 are rejected for the same as claims 14, 5, and 7-9 rejection above.
Claims 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘940, ‘568, and ‘778, as being applied to claim 26 rejection above, further in view of Maeda et al. (US 5281295, hereafter ‘295) and Barbee Jr. (US 20140262753, hereafter 753).
The combination of ‘940, ‘568, and ‘778 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 27: a gas delivery structure that is routed through station partition walls of the process chamber, the gas delivery structure providing for the delivery of the gas to each of the plurality of stations via a corresponding access port in the gas delivery structure for connecting the gas delivery structure to one of the pedestal assemblies of a corresponding one of the plurality of stations via a corresponding conduit;
at least one flow resistor in the corresponding conduit to regulate gas flow to the corresponding one of the plurality of stations such that the gas flow to the corresponding one of the plurality of stations is approximately equal.
Claim 28: wherein the at least one flow resistor includes a first flow resistor and a second flow resistor configured in the corresponding conduit.
‘295 is analogous art in the field of Semiconductor Fabrication Equipment (title), CVD equipment and RIE (Reactive Ion Etching) equipment in a plurality of processing stations, such as multiple chambers, a processing gas is uniformly supplied to gas dispersing devices 2a to 2e respectively provided at the processing stations for equalized film formation rates, etching rates and the like (col. 1, lines 13-18). ‘295 teaches that the reaction gas supply sources are united and five of the branch pipes 19a to 19e/outlet pipes 20a to 20e are provided so as to correspond to five of the gas dispersing devices 27a to 27e. The outlet pipes 20a to 20e are provided with the needle valves 25a to 25e, respectively (Fig. 1, col. 4, lines 6-11), there may be used flow control orifices or the like capable of controlling the flow rates by adjusting the gas flow capacity of the pipings (col. 4, lines 57-59).
‘753 is analogous art in the field of Semiconductor Fabrication Equipment (title), A thin-film deposition system and method based on separating the function of multiple material sources by locating the sources in separate chambers partitioned by a partition wall, and providing a substrate conveyer, such as a rotating platform, to cyclically convey a substrate between the partitioned chambers (abstract). ‘753 teaches that an inert gas source 65 is connected to the partition wall 54 to flow inert gas, e.g. argon, into the chambers (Fig. 4, [0023]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have adopted the gas supply including valves and/or control orifices of ‘295, to connect the gas source 552 of ‘940 to the chambers of cluster tools of ‘778, for the purpose of uniformly suppling gas to each chamber, as taught by ‘295 (col. 1, line 14). Furthermore, to have utilized the partition wall as part of process or inert/purge gas flow path, as taught by ‘753. It has been held that rearranging parts of an invention only involves routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 VI C.
Claims 30-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘940, ‘568, and ‘778, as being applied to claim 26 rejection above, further in view of ‘678, ‘687, and/or ‘329.
The combination of ‘940, ‘568, and ‘778 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 30: wherein each channel is circumferentially offset from the supply port by a circumferential position, and wherein an arc length of each channel varies as a function of the circumferential position of each respective channel relative to the supply port.
Claim 31: wherein as a circumferential distance from the supply port increases, the arc length of a given one of the plurality of channels increases.
‘678 and ‘687 are analogous art as discussed above.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have recognized the gas non-uniformity because the uniform edge ring nozzles 540 as shown in Fig. 5A-5B of ‘940, as taught by Fig. 14 of ‘786, and to have applied higher density of gas holes downstream of the gas supply port of ‘678 or a larger arc length downstream of the gas supply port, as taught by ‘786, by re-arranging the increased length of gas nozzle holes 4 along the circumferential direction (the limitations of 2-3, 15-16, and 42), for the purpose of uniformly supplying gas, as taught by ‘786 ([0027]). Note placing the increase length of gas nozzle holes has two options, one along the circumferential direction and the other perpendicular to the circumferential direction, a limited choice.
‘329 is analogous art as discussed above.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have gradually increased the diameter/width of the nozzle 540 of ‘940 (or the nozzles 212 of ‘296) from inlet side to downstream side of the edge ring 516, as taught by ‘329, for the purpose of uniform gas, as taught by ‘329 (col. 5, line 40). Because the passageway is the complemental portion of the plurality of channels of a ring, the effect of with relationship is opposite to the plurality of channels.
Claim 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘940, ‘568, and ‘778, as being applied to claim 26 rejection above, further in view of ‘296.
‘940 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 32: the purge ring further including a reservoir connecting the distribution volume to the outlet network, and configured to achieve pressure equilibrium before radial flow of the gas to the outlet network occurs.
‘296 is analogous art as discussed above.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have replaced the plenum 544 and nozzle 540 in the edge ring 516 of ‘940 with the gas supply device in Fig. 5 of ‘296, for the purpose of uniformity of gas, as taught by ‘296 ([0084], 2nd sentence).
Claim 38 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘940, ‘568, and ‘778, as being applied to claim 36 rejection above, further in view of ‘837.
The combination of ‘940, ‘568, and ‘778 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 38: wherein in the purge ring, the array of exit apertures is configured on a bottom surface of the purge ring.
‘837 is analogous art as discussed above.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have changed the direction of the edge ring nozzle 540 of ‘940 to a direction beneath the ring, as taught by ‘837, for the purpose of preventing reactant gases from entering into the gap formed between the ring edge and the substrate edge, as taught by ‘837 (col. 11, lines 60-61).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not convincing in light of the new grounds of rejection above.
In regarding to claim objection, see the lower portion of page 11, Applicants amendment overcomes the objection of claim 27. However, Applicants’ amendment new objection of claim 23.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20140335698 is cited for “the porous upper edge ring of the edge ring assembly 200 can be formed from a porous ceramic or glassy material” (Fig. 2B, [0033]).
US 20210287878 is cited for exhaust gas flow path inside the chamber wall (Fig. 3).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEATH T CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1870. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-5:00 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, Parviz Hassanzadeh can be reached at 571-272-1435. 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.
/KEATH T CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights