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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species A, Figures 1A-1F in the reply filed on 01/22/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the identified species I-VII are related by common element of a main clamp, sub-clamp, gasket, leaf spring, and fasteners. The examiner agrees that the identified species do include these common features, however the identified species also include distinguishing features that are generic to the identified species. For example, Species B includes a bushing, Species C requires that the leaf spring be secured to the main clamp and gasket, Species D requires that the gasket includes an oblong portion and hooked oblong portion. None of these features are depicted in Figures 1A-1F. Therefore, the species of Figures 1A-1F is distinct from the other identified species. Further there is no depiction or description of a species that would or could include all these distinct species, and there are no claims presented that are generic to all of the identified species. These distinct features would require their own specific search and as addressed above are distinct from each other. In regard to applicant’s remarks in regard to Species A and B, the examiner agrees. The requirement between these two species is withdrawn.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 8-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 11/24/2025.
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.
Claims 1, 3-5, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 5,868,847) in view of Yoshioka et al. (US 7,601,248 B2).
Claim 1: Chen et al. discloses a clamp assembly (38,20) for securing a substrate (16) in a processing chamber (see Figure 1) that includes a main clamp (20); a sub-clamp (38) having a tapered inner edge (61); a spacer (60) disposed within the sub-clamp, the spacer being proximate to the tapered inner edge including a spacer contact surface (surface of 60 that contacts the substrate 16) configured to contact a substrate; and a leaf spring (70) secured to the sub-clamp by at least one of a plurality of fasteners (Col. 7, Lines 33-57).
While Chen et al. discloses a portion of the limitation recited in claim 1, Chen et al. fails to disclose a gasket.
However, Yoshioka et al. teaches that it is known in the art to contact a substrate (W of Figure 20A) with a gasket (160,160A of Figure 2A) that is secured to a sub-clamp (190 of Figure 20A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute a gasket for the spacer of Chen et al. because a gasket would provide a seal between the wafer and the clamp assembly. This would prevent deposited material from building up on parts of the clamping assembly that would be difficult to clean.
Claim 3: Chen et al. further discloses that the leaf spring is one of a plurality of leaf springs disposed in a first array along an edge of the clamp assembly (Col. 7, Lines 33-57), wherein a length of the leaf spring is perpendicular to the tapered inner edge of the sub- clamp (as depicted in Figure 7).
Claim 4: Chen et al. fails to disclose that the first array comprises between about 5 and about 15 leaf springs.
However, Chen et al. does disclose that the array includes 3 leaf springs (Col. 7, Lines 33-57).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to duplicate the leaf springs of Chen et al. in order to provide an array of leaf springs between 5 and 15 leaf springs because it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St, Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Claim 5: Chen et al. further discloses that the leaf spring is one of a plurality of leaf springs disposed in an array along an edge of the clamp assembly (Col. 7, Lines 33-57), and that a length of the leaf spring is parallel to the tapered inner edge of the sub-clamp (as depicted in Figure 4, this length would be the length of the width of the leaf spring).
Claim 7: Yoshioka et al. fails to explicitly teach that the gasket contact surface has a width greater than a cross-sectional height of the gasket.
However, the gasket contact surface of Yoshioka et al. and the spacer contact surface of Chen et al. both have a specific width relative to the cross-sectional height of the gasket and spacer.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the shape of the gasket such that it was of a width that was greater than a cross-sectional height of the gasket because there is no invention in merely changing the shape or form of an article without changing its function except in a design patent. Eskimo Pie Corp. v. Levous et al., 3 USPQ 23.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 5,868,847) in view of Yoshioka et al. (US 7,601,248 B2) and Dean et al. (US 4,473,455).
Claim 2: Chen et al. fails to disclose that the leaf spring is secured to the main clamp by another of the plurality of fasteners and configured to deform as the gasket displaces upward.
However, Dean et al. teaches that it is known in the to secure a leaf spring (63 of Figure 5) to a sub-clamp (56) using a fastener and to a main clamp (18) using another fastener (as depicted in Figures 5-8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the leaf spring of Chen et al. such that it was secured to the sub-clamp by a fastener and to the main clamp by another fastener because the leaf spring would be better retained in the desired position.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON L VAUGHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5704. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday 8:30 - 5:00.
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, Sunil Singh can be reached at (571) 272-3460. 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.
/JASON L VAUGHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726