Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/330,262

PULSED PLASMA CHAMBER IN DUAL CHAMBER CONFIGURATION

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jun 06, 2023
Examiner
CROWELL, ANNA M
Art Unit
1716
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Lam Research Corporation
OA Round
4 (Final)
45%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 9m
To Grant
57%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 45% of resolved cases
45%
Career Allow Rate
191 granted / 424 resolved
-20.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 9m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
463
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
55.9%
+15.9% vs TC avg
§102
19.2%
-20.8% vs TC avg
§112
13.2%
-26.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 424 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Claim Interpretation Note. A system controller that is operable for setting a first pressure for the upper chamber and setting a second pressure for the lower chamber is interpreted as a system controller “configured” for setting a first pressure for the upper chamber and setting a second pressure for the lower chamber. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: (a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Claims 1-5 and 7-12 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Paterson et al (U.S. 2008/0178805) in view of Koshimizu (U.S. 6,214,162) and Chen et al. (U.S. 2011/0177694). Referring to Figure 2 and paragraphs [0021]-[0043], Paterson et al. disclose a wafer processing apparatus, comprising: an upper chamber 15a including a gas intake configured to provide a first flow of gas received from a first gas source 112 to the upper chamber, the upper chamber 15a configured to generate an upper plasma (par.[0030]); an upper electrode 109, 116 connected to a radio frequency (RF) power source 122, wherein the RF power source provides continuous RF power to the upper electrode, wherein the upper electrode is always powered ON during operation for continuous generation of the upper plasma including neutral and charged species (par.[0021], i.e. RF Power source 122 can be operated to be turned on continuously.); a lower chamber 15b configured to generate a lower plasma through capacitive coupling (par.[0020]); a perforated grounded electrode 10 separating the upper chamber from the lower chamber, the perforated grounded electrode having a plurality of through holes to enable a flow of neutral and charged species from the upper plasma in the upper chamber to the lower chamber, wherein the perforated grounded electrode includes a plurality of gas outlets providing a second flow of gas from a second gas source 76, 78 to the lower chamber (par.[0028]); a lower electrode 103 in the lower chamber connected to a first RF power source 132, 134 providing a first RF power to the lower electrode for generation of a lower plasma using the second flow of gas and the continuous flow of the neutral and charged species (par.[0024], i.e. first RF Power source 134 can be operated at high frequency (i.e. 27 MHz) which will generate a lower plasma); and a system controller that is operable for setting a first pressure for the upper chamber and setting a second pressure for the lower chamber (par.[0030]), wherein the first pressure that is set and the second pressure that is set are independently controlled (par.[0035]). Paterson et al. is silent on a lower electrode connected to a first RF pulsed power source providing a first RF pulsed power to the lower electrode. Referring to Figures 1, 2, 4, and column 6, lines 46-54, column 7, lines 32-59, Koshimizu teaches that it is conventionally known in the art for a lower electrode connected to a first RF pulsed power source providing a first RF pulsed power to the lower electrode in order to control etching shape, selectivity, reducing unwanted charge-up. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the first power source of Paterson et al. to be a first RF pulsed power source as taught by Koshimizu in order to control etching shape, selectivity, reducing unwanted charge-up. Therefore, the modified apparatus of Paterson et al. in view of Koshimizu would yield a lower electrode connected to a first pulsed RF power source providing a first pulsed RF power to the lower electrode for generation of a lower plasma using the second flow of gas and the continuous flow of the neutral and charged species. Paterson et al. fail to teach wherein the first pressure ranges between about 100 mTorr to about 1 Torr, and the second pressure ranges between about 5mTorr to about 100 mTorr. Referring to paragraph [0115]), Chen et al. teach a pressure control system 354 for controlling the first pressure ranges between about 100 mTorr to about 1 Torr since it is conventionally known pressure range for plasma generation, and the second pressure ranges between about 5mTorr to about 100 mTorr since it is conventionally known pressure range for substrate processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to operate the controller of Paterson et al. such that the first pressure ranges between about 100 mTorr to about 1 Torr, and the second pressure ranges between about 5mTorr to about 100 mTorr as taught by Chen et al. in order to achieve the desired plasma conditions for plasma generation and substrate processing. With respect to claim 2, the wafer processing apparatus of Paterson et al. in view of Koshimizu further comprising: a pulse controller 154 operate to set a voltage and a frequency of the pulsed RF power source, and to set a pulsing cycle for the pulsed RF power source to (Koshimizu-Figures 1, 2, 4, and column 6, lines 46-54, column 7, lines 32-59). With respect to claim 3, the wafer processing apparatus of Paterson et al. in view of Koshimizu further comprising: a continuous wave (CW) controller 140 to set a voltage and frequency of a continuous wave RF signal for the continuous RF power source 122 (Paterson et al.-Fig. 2, pars.[0021]-[0024]). With respect to claim 4, the wafer processing apparatus of Paterson et al. further includes wherein the upper chamber and upper electrode are configured as an inductively coupled plasma chamber to form the upper plasma through inductive coupling 114 (par.[0021]). With respect to claim 5, the wafer processing apparatus of Paterson et al. further includes wherein the upper chamber and upper electrode 109, 116 are configured as another CCP chamber to form the upper plasma through capacitive coupling (par.[0021]). With respect to claim 7, the wafer processing apparatus of Paterson et al. in view of Koshimizu further comprising: a system controller 140 configured to set parameters for the upper chamber and parameter for the lower chamber to regulate the flow of neutral and charged species from the upper chamber to the lower chamber through the perforated grounded electrode during an ON-period duration and an OFF-period duration for a pulsing cycle for the pulsed RF power source (Paterson et al.-pars.[0024], [0030]). With respect to claim 8, the wafer processing apparatus of Paterson et al. in view of Koshimizu further includes wherein the system controller 140 is operable to set a first pressure in the upper chamber and a second pressure in the lower chamber, wherein the first pressure is higher than the second pressure (Paterson et al.-pars.[0030],[0035]-Paterson et al.). With respect to claim 9, the wafer processing apparatus of Paterson et al. in view of Koshimizu further includes wherein the system controller 140 regulates the flow of neutral and charged species from the upper chamber to the bottom chamber to control negative-ion etching in the lower chamber and to regulate positive charge on the wafer surface during an afterglow phase of the OFF-period (Paterson et al. discloses regulating the flow of species-par.[0030]-[0039], Koshimizu discloses controlling the on/off of the pulse controller- column 7, lines 32-59). Note. With regards to wherein regulating the flow of species in order to regulate a negative- ion etching and positive charge on the wafer surface during afterglow in the OFF period, this is a result of regulating the RF power sources used with a continuous wave controller and a pulse controller of Paterson et al. in view of Koshimizu. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the time of the invention to program the system controller of Paterson et al. to regulate the CW controller of Paterson et al. and the pulse controller of Koshimizu during the ON period and during the OFF period and to regulate negative-ion etching in the bottom chamber and to regulate positive charge on a wafer surface in the bottom chamber during afterglow in the OFF period in order to control the etch bias, sheath, dissociation chemistry, etching shape, selectivity and reducing unwanted charge-up. With respect to claim 10, the wafer processing apparatus of Paterson et al. in view of Koshimizu further includes wherein the system controller 140 is configured to regulate the flow of neutral and charged species to enable control of etching of the wafer during the ON-period and during the OFF-period (Paterson et al. discloses regulating the flow of species-par.[0030]-[0039], Koshimizu discloses controlling the on/off of the pulse controller- column 7, lines 32-59). With respect to claim 11, the wafer processing apparatus of Paterson et al. in view of Koshimizu further includes wherein the system controller 140 maintains in the upper chamber a continuous top plasma that is not pulsed, wherein the continuous upper plasma on the upper chamber increases an amount of negative ions in the lower chamber during the OFF-period to improve etching with negative ions in the lower chamber, wherein electrons from the upper chamber travel to the lower chamber and attach to ions in the lower chamber to create more negative ions in the lower chamber during the OFF-period (Paterson et al. discloses one operating mode of continuous top plasma that is not pulsed-(par.[0024], Koshimizu disclose one operating mode wherein the top power source is run in a continuous wave and the bias power source is pulsed on/off using a pulse controller- column 7, lines 32-59). With respect to claim 12, the wafer processing apparatus of Paterson et al. in view of Koshimizu further includes wherein the parameters for the lower chamber includes a lower chamber pressure, wherein the system controller regulates the flow of electrons from the upper chamber to the lower chamber to assist in re-striking the lower plasma during the ON-period (Paterson et al.-par.[0029]-[0030], i.e. system controller 140 controls vacuum pump 160 to regulate chamber pressures). Claim 6 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable Paterson et al (U.S. 2008/0178805) in view of Koshimizu (U.S. 6,214,162) and Chen et al. (U.S. 2011/0177694) as applied to claims 1-5, and 7-12 above, and further in view of (Loewenhardt et al. (U.S. 2004/0221958) or Liao et al. U.S. 2011/0031216). The teachings of Paterson et al. in view of Koshimizu and Chen et al. have been taught above. Paterson et al. in view of Koshimizu and Chen et al. is silent on a second pulsed RF power source providing a second pulsed RF power to the lower electrode. Referring to Figure 1 and paragraphs [0016]-[0018], [0025], Loewenhardt et al. teach a first pulsed RF power source 144 providing a first pulsed RF power and a second pulsed RF power source 148 providing a second pulsed RF power to the lower electrode 108 in order to control the etch bias, sheath, and dissociation chemistry. Referring to Figure 1 and paragraphs [0018] and [0020], Liao et al. teach a first pulsed RF power source 144 providing a first pulsed RF power and a second pulsed RF power source 148 providing a second pulsed RF power to the lower electrode 136 in order to control the plasma density. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide the apparatus of Paterson et al. in view of Koshimizu and Chen et al. with a second pulsed RF power source providing a second pulsed RF power to the lower electrode as taught by Loewenhardt et al. or Liao et al. in order to control the etch bias, sheath, plasma density, and dissociation chemistry. Claim 13 rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Paterson et al (U.S. 2008/0178805) in view of Koshimizu (U.S. 6,214,162) and Chen et al. (U.S. 2011/0177694) as applied to claims 1-5, and 7-12 above, and further in view of Dhindsa et al (U.S. 2008/0149596). The teachings of Paterson et al. in view of Koshimizu and Chen et al. have been taught above. Paterson et al. in view of Koshimizu and Chen et al. is silent on wherein an interior cavity surround the upper chamber and the lower chamber. Referring to Figure 2 and paragraph [0019] an interior cavity surround the chamber as a suitable means of exhausting the gas to the pump. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the apparatus of Paterson et al. in view of Koshimizu and Chen et al. with an interior cavity surround the upper chamber and the lower chamber as taught by Dhindsa et al. since a suitable means of exhausting the gas to the pump. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new reference Chen et al. teach wherein the first pressure ranges between about 100 mTorr to about 1 Torr, and the second pressure ranges between about 5mTorr to about 100 mTorr. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yuda et al.’384 teach an apparatus having upper and lower chambers wherein the first pressure that is set and the second pressure that is set are independently controlled. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Michelle CROWELL whose telephone number is (571)272-1432. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10:00am-6:00pm. 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 on 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. /Michelle CROWELL/ Examiner, Art Unit 1716 /SYLVIA MACARTHUR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 06, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 27, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jun 03, 2024
Response Filed
Sep 19, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 20, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 20, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 21, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
May 28, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 18, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Apr 04, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603255
PLASMA PROCESSING APPARATUS AND PLASMA PROCESSING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604708
ATOMIC LAYER ETCH SYSTEMS FOR SELECTIVELY ETCHING WITH HALOGEN-BASED COMPOUNDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12555741
MAGNETIC HOUSING SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12548739
PLASMA SOURCE FOR SEMICONDUCTOR PROCESSING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12525439
APPARATUS FOR PLASMA PROCESSING AND METHOD OF ETCHING
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
45%
Grant Probability
57%
With Interview (+11.9%)
3y 9m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 424 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month