DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on (4/6/2023), is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims (9-15 and 21-33) are pending in response to election requirement dated 12/12/2025 and election without traverse dated 5/28/2026 and being examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 9-15 and 21-33 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 9, 26 and 31 recite resonant frequency of the antenna or plasma chamber. The specification does not appear to be clear on this. It is noted that resonant frequency of antenna when associated with the plasma chamber would be different with or without plasma. In this examination resonant frequency of the antenna is considered when associated with plasma.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 9-12, 14-15, 21 and 26-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Collins et al (US 5556501) in view of Howald et al (US 6876155) and Caimi et al (US 20120019420).
Collins et al disclose an inductively coupled plasma chamber for plasma processing like etching and disclose providing power from a power supply and matching network (31) to an antenna (30) of a plasma chamber (Fig 1 and Col 8 lines 4-15). Collins teach that matching network is conventional including capacitive and inductive components and transmission line (Col 13 lines 9-17 and Fig 4-9) assembled in several configurations.
Collins further teach that typically the antenna is tuned to resonance by the action of RF power supply by controlling resonance frequency or adding a resonating element to antenna (Col 12 lines 48-58). Collins further teach detecting voltage phase and current to control RF frequency and resonance of the antenna (Fig 16)
Collins do not explicitly disclose fixed transmission line as matching or resonant frequency component.
Howald et al disclose matching and resonance more explicitly using adjustable capacitor (116 and 112) and disclose sensor to detect voltage , current and phase (Fig 1).
Howald et al teach that the antenna is resonant to frequency of the source and resonance is accomplished by the microprocessor (Col 7 lines 23-31, lines 53-55, Col 12 lines 26-35). Referencing Fig 11, Howald teaches that the source frequency and resonant frequency of loop 1010 (incudes plasma impedance) in Fig 10 are same (Col 12 line 51– Col 13 line 18).
Caimi et al explicitly disclose using fixed length transmission line as an impedance element that could change the resonant frequency (abstract). Caimi uses this as an impedance element with its antenna as discussed in (Abstract, Para 154, 160, 161 Page 18-19 Claim 1 and claim 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application to have a fixed length transmission line in order for the antenna to resonate at the source frequency.
The subject matter of dependent claims is disclosed in Collins et al in view of Howald et al and Caimi et al as noted above. However, following discussion points to them more explicitly.
Regarding claim 10 phase is detected as disclosed in Howald and used as feed back for frequency control (Col 3 lines 40-60). Feed back control is also disclosed in Collins (Fig 16 and description).
Regarding claims 11 and 27 one of ordinary skill in the art would know that phase angle of 0 would indicate resonance. Therefore, the claimed threshold would be obvious.
Regarding claim 12 feedback control of matching is disclosed integrated with resonant frequency as in above discussion of claim 10.
Regarding claims 14, 15, 32 and 33 having switching between two different fixed length transmission lines is similar to switching impedance as disclosed in Caimi (Fig 17 or 22 and description).
Regarding claim 21 since capacitors connected in parallel add in value having such bank to create desired capacitance or use a well-known mechanical variable capacitor would have been obvious.
Regarding claims 26 and 31 being in similar scope as claim 9 are being rejected similarly.
Regarding claim 28 reciting feedback control of matching condition is as discussed above regarding claims 11-12 and 27.
Regarding claims 29 and 30 adjustable capacitor being part of the matching network as in Collins et al and Howald et al would be in claimed position since fixed length is associated and combined with the antenna as discussed in regards to Caimi.
Claims 13 and 22-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Collins et al (US 5556501) in view of Howald et al (US 6876155), Caimi et al (US 20120019420) and Carrol et al (US 20220076923).
Regarding claims 13 and others as above, Carrol et al disclose, twenty different configurations of matching circuits with capacitors and inductors as in (Fig 2-21).
Regarding claim 22 polarized capacitor as impedance element id disclosed in (Para 50).
Since different configurations provide specific advantage according to the process needs such arrangements would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Caimi et al (US 20070222697) discloses a fixed length transmission line as impedance element (Para 160, Claims 40 and 44).
Collins (US 6545420) discloses matching integrated with resonant frequency control of antenna ( Col 12 lines 50-56)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAM N KACKAR whose telephone number is (571)272-1436. The examiner can normally be reached 09:00 AM-05:00 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 5712721435. 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.
RAM N. KACKAR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1716
/RAM N KACKAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights