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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 28 July 2026 has been entered.
Election/Restrictions and Claim Status
Applicant’s elections without traverse of Group I and Species A in the replies filed on 16 December 2025 and 8 January 2026 were previously acknowledged.
Claim 10 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected invention(s), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the aforementioned replies.
Claims 3 and 11-16 have been cancelled
Claim Interpretations
A single attachment/detachment chamber has been generically as a chamber capable of attachment and detachment of a substrate to carrier.
Claim limitation “the first rotation chamber is positioned between (i) the first deposition chamber and the second deposition chamber and (ii) the single substrate attachment/detachment chamber” has been interpreted as -- i) the first rotation chamber is positioned between the first deposition chamber and the single substrate attachment/detachment chamber; AND ii) the first rotation chamber is positioned between the second deposition chamber and the single substrate attachment/detachment chamber.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claim(s) 1, 3 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2019/0338413 to Shiripov et al. in view of U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2007/0009652 to Manz et al. and U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2011/0281038 to Yamazaki et al.
Regarding claim 1: Shiripov et al. disclose a plurality of structural elements constituting an evaporation device, as illustrated in Figs. 2-4, substantially as claimed, the evaporation device comprising: a first chamber group (see annotated figure below) comprising a plurality of evaporation chambers (3) which are arranged in line in a first conveyance direction in which a processing substrate is conveyed; a second chamber group (see annotated figure below) comprising a plurality of evaporation chambers (3) which are arranged in line in a second conveyance direction which is an opposite direction of the first conveyance direction; a first rotation chamber (see annotated figure below) which is connected (via loading chamber and load lock chambers) to a first evaporation chamber (“1EC”, see annotated figure below) located at a most upstream position (relative to other evaporation chambers of the first chamber group) in the first conveyance direction in the first chamber group and a second evaporation chamber (“2EC”, see annotated figure below) located at a most downstream position (relative to other evaporation chambers of the second chamber group) in the second conveyance direction in the second chamber group, and rotates the processing substrate carried out of the second evaporation chamber to carry the processing substrate into the first evaporation chamber; a second rotation chamber (see annotated figure below) which is connected to a third evaporation chamber (“3EC”, see annotated figure below) located at a most downstream position (relative to other evaporation chambers of the first chamber group) in the first conveyance direction in the first chamber group and a fourth evaporation chamber (“4EC”, see annotated figure below) located at a most upstream position (relative to other evaporation chambers of the second chamber group) in the second conveyance direction in the second chamber group, and rotates the processing substrate carried out of the third evaporation chamber to carry the processing substrate to the fourth evaporation chamber.
Note: claim 1 includes many limitations drawn to intended uses of the claimed invention (e.g. with respect to the manipulation of the substrate through the evaporation device) of which Shiripov et al. is considered capable of executing, Examiner notes that the courts have ruled a claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987)
PNG
media_image1.png
266
660
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, while Shiripov et al. do disclose a substrate attachment/detachment chamber (24 and 25) connected to the first rotation chamber where a processing substrate is attached and detached from a carrier (8) respectively, Shiripov et al. fail to disclose the substrate attachment/detachment chamber as a single attachment/detachment chamber (i.e. a chamber capable of attachment and detachment) connected to the first rotation chamber, wherein i) the first rotation chamber is positioned between the first evaporation chamber and the single substrate attachment detachment chamber; ii) the first rotation chamber is positioned between second evaporation chamber and the single substrate attachment detachment chamber; and iii) the single substrate attachment/detachment chamber is configured to attach the processing substrate carried into the single substrate attachment/detachment chamber to a carrier, carry the carrier to the first rotation chamber, and detach, from the carrier carried out in the first rotation, the same processing substrate that was attached to the carrier.
Examiner notes prior art reference Manz et al., which provides various arrangements of a substrate processing apparatus for evaporation, including one in Fig. 7, wherein a first rotation chamber (390) is positioned between (i) a first evaporation chamber (303) and a second evaporation chamber (304) and (ii) a substrate attachment/detachment chamber (305), wherein the arrangements and rearrangements set forth provide for, inter alia, a substrate processing apparatus for evaporation having a small space requirement with substantially increased (or optimized) throughput and efficiency (see, e.g., paras. 11-24, 85-86).
Additionally, Examiner notes prior art reference Yamazaki et al. which also provides various arrangements of a substrate processing apparatus for evaporation, including one in Fig. 5 that includes a loading/attachment chamber (201) and an unloading/detachment chamber (502). Although illustrated as separate chambers, Yamazaki et al. states that the loading chamber and unloading chamber may be formed integrally together to shared function (see, e.g., paras. 15, 67, 76). Additionally, in Fig. 16, Yamazaki et al. disclose providing a rotation chamber (1607) for redirecting a carrier (1600) to a plurality of evaporation chambers (1610-1612, 1616) including a first evaporation chamber and a second evaporation chamber, wherein i) the rotation chamber is between a single substrate attachment/detachment chamber (1607) and the first evaporation chamber; and ii) ) the rotation chamber is also between the single substrate attachment/detachment chamber and the second evaporation chamber, such that the single substrate attachment/detachment chamber is configured to attach the processing substrate carried into the single substrate attachment/detachment chamber to the carrier, carry the carrier to the rotation chamber, and detach, from the carrier carried out of the rotation chamber, the same processing substrate that was attached to the carrier. Similar to Manz et al., Yamazaki et al. is also concerned with minimizing the footprint of the apparatus as is often the case in multi-chamber apparatus as is well-known in the art (see, e.g., para. 10).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before Applicant’s invention was effectively filed to have provided a rearrangement of Shiripov et al. including the substrate attachment/detachment chamber as a single attachment detachment chamber (i.e. a chamber capable of attachment and detachment) connected to the first rotation chamber, wherein i) the first rotation chamber is positioned between the first evaporation chamber and the single substrate attachment detachment chamber; ii) the first rotation chamber is positioned between second evaporation chamber and the single substrate attachment detachment chamber; and iii) the single substrate attachment/detachment chamber is configured to attach the processing substrate carried into the single substrate attachment/detachment chamber to a carrier, carry the carrier to the first rotation chamber, and detach, from the carrier carried out in the first rotation, the same processing substrate that was attached to the carrier as an option for providing a substrate processing apparatus for evaporation having a small space requirement/footprint with substantially increased (or optimized) throughput and efficiency as taught by Manz et al. and Yamazaki et al.
With respect to claim 3, in modified Shiripov et al., Shiripov et al. further discloses a first conveyance rail (11) extending from the first evaporation chamber to the third evaporation chamber and configured to convey the carrier; and a second conveyance rail (11) extending from the second evaporation chamber to the fourth evaporation chamber and configured to convey the substrate.
With respect to claim 9, in modified Shiripov et al., which is drawn to processing materials, the resulting layer formed and/or the article worked upon during an intended use of the claimed device, Examiner notes that the courts have ruled that a claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987); expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim. Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969); the inclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. In re Young, 75 F.2d 966, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963)).
Claim(s) 4-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Shiripov et al. as applied to claims 1, 3 and 9 above further in view of U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2013/0280840 to Sonoda et al.
Modified Shiripov et al. disclose the device substantially as claimed and as described above.
Additionally, with respect to claim 4, in Shiripov et al., each of the evaporation chambers comprises an evaporation source (4) configured to emit a material.
However, Shiripov et al. fail to explicitly disclose the evaporation source having a discharge port and/or each of the evaporation chambers also comprises a partition plate which partitions the evaporation chamber into a first space in which the evaporation source is accommodated and a second space in which the process substrate is conveyed, the first conveyance rail is provided in the second space of each of the evaporation chambers including the first evaporation chamber and the third evaporation chamber, the second conveyance rail is provided in the second space of each of the evaporation chambers including the second evaporation chamber and the fourth evaporation chamber, the partition plate comprises an opening facing the evaporation source, and the evaporation source of each of the evaporation chambers is configured such that the discharge port faces the first space in a mode in which the emitted material is not deposited on the processing substrate, and the discharge port face the second space in a mode in which the emitted material is deposited on the processing substrate.
Sonoda discloses an evaporation chamber including an evaporation source (80) having a discharge port (one of 81a, or 81b or 81c); and a partition plate (Fig. 2, 84) which partitions the evaporation chamber into a first space (e.g., above 84) in which an evaporation source (80) is accommodated and a second space (e.g., below 84) in which a process substrate (70) is conveyed, the partition plate comprises an opening (84a) facing the evaporation source, and the evaporation source of each of the evaporation chambers is configured such that the discharge port faces the first space in a mode in which the emitted material is not deposited on the processing substrate from the selected discharge port, and the discharge port faces the second space in a mode in which the emitted material is deposited on the processing substrate for the purpose of allowing the distribution amount to be changed (see, e.g., abstract).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before Applicant’s invention was effectively filed to have provided in Shiripov et al. the evaporation source having a discharge port and each of the evaporation chambers also comprises a partition plate which partitions the evaporation chamber into a first space in which the evaporation source is accommodated and a second space in which the process substrate is conveyed, the first conveyance rail is provided in the second space of each of the evaporation chambers including the first evaporation chamber and the third evaporation chamber, the second conveyance rail is provided in the second space of each of the evaporation chambers including the second evaporation chamber and the fourth evaporation chamber, the partition plate comprises an opening facing the evaporation source, and the evaporation source of each of the evaporation chambers is configured such that the discharge port faces the first space in a mode in which the emitted material is not deposited on the processing substrate from the discharge port , and the discharge port faces the second space in a mode in which the emitted material is deposited on the processing substrate using the discharge port in order to allow a deposition amount to be changed as taught by Sonoda et al.
With respect to claims 5-8, which are drawn to processing materials, the resulting layer formed and/or the article worked upon during an intended use of the claimed device, Examiner notes that the courts have ruled that expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim. Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969); and the inclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. In re Young, 75 F.2d 966, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963)).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 3-9 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Newly relied upon prior art reference, Yamazaki et al., which is incorporated into the modified rejections presented above, addresses the arrangement of the evaporation device as now claimed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. USP Pub. 2009/02266; USP Pub. 20110281038; DE 10 205 168; and KR 10-2018-0083259 disclose in-line coating devices with rotation chambers. USP Pub. No. 2011/0268893 disclose a rotating evaporation source. USP Pub. No. 2020/0243768 discloses an inline substrate processing apparatus with rotations chamber.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KARLA MOORE whose telephone number is (571)272-1440. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-6pm EST.
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.
/KARLA A MOORE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights