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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicants’ submission, filed on 12/17/2025, addressing rejection of claims 1-10, 13-23, and 26-38 from the non-final office action (10/07/2025), by amending claims 1, 5-6, 8-9, 13, 15-23, 26-27, and 30-38 and cancelling claims 11-12, 14-15, and 39-30 is entered and will be addressed below.
Election/Restrictions
Applicants’ cancellation of claims 11-12, 24-25, and 39-40 is acknowledged. As a result, no claims are currently withdrawn.
Claim Objection
Claim 27 “for connecting the gas delivery structure to a one of the pedestal assemblies” should be ““for connecting the gas delivery structure to [[a]] one of the pedestal assemblies“.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretations
The “the plurality of channels and the plurality of passageways are configured to provide a uniform pressure of the exit flow “ of claims 1, 13, and 26, “wherein the outer channel is configured to achieve pressure equilibrium before radial flow of the gas to the outlet network occurs“ of claim 2 and similar for claim 4, 15, 17, 30, and 32, it is noted that pressure equilibrium can be achieved only in a closed system. These claim will be examined as about equal pressure in the outer channel because of the high flow resistance flowing to the outlet network. Also, in this sense, before refers to flow direction, in the sense that upstream is before downstream. As such, uniform is comparing relative to the flow at other components upstream or downstream.
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. Clarification of what passageways is requested.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-3, 8-9, 13-16, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Zhang et al. (US 20190362940, from IDS, hereafter ‘940).
‘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 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 configured to provide an exit flow of the gas proximate to an inner diameter of the purge ring” and as shown in Fig. 5A; the rest of the ring nozzle is considered a flow channels, 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 “a plurality of passageways configured to reduce flow of the gas in the radial direction between the outer channel and the outlet network”),
the edge ring 424 corresponds to a ceramic or quartz edge ring (Fig. 4A-4B, [0039], 3rd last sentence, description is applicable to Fig. 5A, note both Fig. 4B and Fig. 5A shows the edge ring in a raised position, including the claimed “wherein the plurality of passageways are located within a ceramic of the purge ring“, in case Applicants argue that Fig. 5A and Fig. 4B are different embodiments, it is obvious to choose ceramic as the edge ring 516),
Fig. 5A shows the size of plenum 544 much larger than the size of the nozzle 540 (therefore, achieving about equal pressure in the plenum 544 before going downstream nozzle 540, including the claimed “wherein the plurality of channels and the plurality of passageways are configured to provide a uniform pressure of the exit flow of the gas across a circumference of the outlet network”).
Claim 1 is rejected for substantially the same reason as claim 13 rejection above.
Claim 2 and 15: Fig. 5A shows the size of plenum 544 much larger than the size of the nozzle 540 (therefore, achieving about equal pressure in the plenum 544 before going downstream nozzle 540, including the claimed “wherein in the purge ring the outer channel is configured to achieve pressure equilibrium before radial flow of the gas to the outlet network occurs”).
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 3 and 16: “a distribution volume connecting the outer channel and the outlet network, the distribution volume including the plurality of channels and the plurality of passageways” is a definition.
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 the exit flow of the gas “ of claim 8 and “wherein in the purge ring, the outlet network includes an array of exit apertures, each of the plurality of exit apertures configured to provide a corresponding portion of the 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 circumference of the outlet network “ of claim 9 “wherein in the purge ring, exit apertures in the array of exit apertures are distributed symmetrically around the circumference of the outlet network” of claim 22.
Claims 4 and 17, and alternatively claims 1-3, 8-9, 13-16, and 21-22, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘940, in view of Kim et al. (US 20070087296, hereafter ‘296).
In case Applicants argue that ‘940 does not teach a uniform pressure of the exit flow of claims 1 and 13.
‘940 does not teach the limitations of:
Claims 4 and 17: further comprising: 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 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).
PNG
media_image1.png
776
790
media_image1.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)]
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 5-6 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘940 (optionally with ‘296), as being applied to claims 1 and 13 rejection above, in view of Kanai et al. (US 4908329, hereafter ‘329).
‘940 (optionally with ‘296) does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 5: wherein a first radial width of a first channel centered at a first radial distance from the supply port is larger than a second radial width of a second channel centered at a second radial distance that is closer to the supply port.
Claim 18: wherein in the purge ring, a first radial width of a first channel centered at a first radial distance from the supply port is larger than a second radial width of a second channel centered at a second radial distance that is closer to supply port.
Claim 6: wherein a first radial width of a first passageway centered at a first radial distance from the supply port is smaller than a second radial width of a second passageway centered at a second radial distance that is closer to the supply port.
Claim 19: wherein in the purge ring, a first radial width of a first passageway centered at a first radial distance from the supply port is smaller than a second radial width of a second passageway centered at a second radial distance that is closer to the supply port.
‘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 (for claims 6 and 19).
Claims 7 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘940 and ‘296, as being applied to claims 1 and 13 rejection above, in view of Balan (US 7992877, hereafter ‘877).
The combination of ‘940 and ‘296 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 7: wherein a passageway in the plurality of passageways comprises a porous media.
Claim 20: wherein in the purge ring, a passageway in the plurality of passageways includes a porous media.
‘877 is analogous art in the field of Non Contact Substrate Chuck (title). ‘877 teaches that the gas pressure delivery portions 12 of the chuck 10 are formed in discreet annular rings, with the gas vacuum drawing portions 14 defined between the discreet annular rings (Fig. 1, col. 3, lines 39-42), As depicted in FIG. 3, there are gas pressure delivery channels 24 formed throughout the body 30 of the chuck 10. The gas pressure delivery channels 24 of the embodiment depicted are in communication with the gas pressure delivery portions 12 of the chuck 10, and are also in communication with the gas pressure delivery port 22. In some embodiments, the gas pressure delivery port 22 is connected to a pressure source (col. 4, lines 6-14), The gas pressure delivery portions 12 of the embodiments depicted in FIGS. 2 and 3 are formed of a porous material, such as a porous ceramic (col. 4, lines 38-40), With reference now to FIG. 4, there is depicted a cross-section diagram of another embodiment of the chuck 10. In the embodiment as depicted, the body 30 of the chuck 10 is substantially completely formed of the porous material (col. 4, lines 57-60).
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 porous ceramic of ‘877 as the material of the first gas supply member 210 (optionally also the inner ring of the second gas supply member 220) of ‘296, for its suitability for pressure delivery with predictable results. The selection of something based on its known suitability for its intended use has been held to support a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP 2144.07.
Claims 10 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘940 (optionally with ‘296), as being applied to claims 8 and 21 rejection above, in view of Hillman (US 6409837, hereafter ‘837).
‘940 (optionally with ‘296) does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 10: wherein the array of exit apertures is configured on a bottom surface of the purge ring.
Claim 23: wherein in the purge ring, the array of exit apertures is configured 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).
Claims 26, 29-31, and 36-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘940, in view of 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 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 configured to provide exit flow of the gas proximate to an inner diameter of the purge ring” and as shown in Fig. 5A; the rest of the ring nozzle is considered a flow channels, 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 “a plurality of passageways configured to reduce flow of the gas in the radial direction between the outer channel and the outlet network”),
the edge ring 424 corresponds to a ceramic or quartz edge ring (Fig. 4A-4B, [0039], 3rd last sentence, description is applicable to Fig. 5A, note both Fig. 4B and Fig. 5A shows the edge ring in a raised position, including the claimed “wherein the plurality of passageways are located within a ceramic of the purge ring“, in case Applicants argue that Fig. 5A and Fig. 4B are different embodiment, it is obvious to choose ceramic as the edge ring 516),
Fig. 5A shows the size of plenum 544 much larger than the size of the nozzle 540 (therefore, achieving about equal pressure in the plenum 544 before going downstream nozzle 540, including the claimed “wherein the plurality of channels and the plurality of passageways are configured to provide a uniform pressure of the exit flow of the gas across a circumference of 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: a plurality of stations, each of the plurality of stations (including a pedestal assembly).
‘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). ‘296 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 as multiple process chambers of a cluster tool, as taught by ‘778, for the purpose of productivity of cluster tools.
Claims 29-31 and 36-37 are rejected for the same as claims 14, 2-3, and 8-9 rejection above.
Claims 32, and alternatively claims 26, 29-31, and 36-37, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘940 and ‘778, as being applied to claim 31 rejection above, further in view of ‘296.
In case Applicants argue that ‘940 does not teach a uniform pressure of the exit flow of claim 26.
‘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).
Claims 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘940 and ‘778 (optionally with ‘296), 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 and ‘778 (optionally with ‘296) 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 a 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 33-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘940 and ‘778 (optionally with ‘296), as being applied to claim 26 rejection above, further in view of ‘329.
The combination of ‘940 and ‘778 (optionally with ‘296) does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 33: wherein in the purge ring, a first radial width of a first channel centered at a first radial distance from the supply port is larger than a second radial width of a second channel centered at a second radial distance that is closer to the supply port.
Claim 34: wherein in the purge ring, a first radial width of a first passageway centered at a first radial distance from the supply port is smaller than a second radial width of a second passageway centered at a second radial distance that is closer to the supply port.
‘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 (for claim 34).
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘940, ‘778, and ‘296, as being applied to claim 26 rejection above, further in view of ‘877.
The combination of ‘940, ‘778, and ‘296 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 35: wherein in the purge ring, a passageway in the plurality of passageways includes a porous media.
‘877 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 adopted porous ceramic of ‘877 as the material of the first gas supply member 210 (optionally also the inner ring of the second gas supply member 220) of ‘296, for its suitability for pressure delivery with predictable results. The selection of something based on its known suitability for its intended use has been held to support a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP 2144.07.
Claim 38 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘940 and ‘778 (optionally with ‘296), as being applied to claim 36 rejection above, further in view of ‘837.
The combination of ‘940 and ‘778 (optionally with ‘296) 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 12/17/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In regarding to 35 USC 102(a) rejection over Zhang ‘940, Applicants argue that ‘940 does not teach “wherein the plurality of passageways are located within a ceramic of the purge ring“, see the middle of page 9 and middle of page 13.
This argument is found not persuasive.
‘940 teaches that: the edge ring 424 corresponds to a ceramic or quartz edge ring (Fig. 4A-4B, [0039], 3rd last sentence, description is applicable to Fig. 5A), note both Fig. 4B and Fig. 5A shows the edge ring in a raised position.
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).
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 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