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 without traverse of Group I, Species VI (Figs. 12-13 (claims 1-16, 18) in the reply filed on 03/06/2026 is acknowledged. However claims 4, 9-10 does not read on elected specie and therefore withdrawn from consideration.
Claims 4, 9-10, 17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/10/11.
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.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 11 recues “wherein each of the plurality of plates is fixed to the gas supplier” is indefinite in view of specification as describes each of the plurality of plates is fixed to the props 304a, 304b, 304c as shown in Fig. 13 and will be examined as fixed to the props.
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 of this title, 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, 5-8, 11-16, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Iriuda et al (JP 2017079289A).
Regarding claims 1, 16: Iriuda teaches in Fig. 1-12 about a substrate processing apparatus comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
575
892
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a substrate holder 77 that holds a plurality of substrates W;
a reaction tube 11 that houses the substrate holder (Fig. 1);
a gas supplier 41 that has a plurality of supply holes 43 corresponding one-to-one to the plurality of substrates and supplies gas to the plurality of substrates (Fig. 1); and
a plurality of plates 78 provided in substantially parallel to the plurality of substrates, wherein:
at least part of each of the plurality of plates is disposed between the gas supplier and the substrate holder.
Iriuda does not explicitly show in Fig. 12 at least part of each of the plurality of plates is disposed between the gas supplier and the substrate holder.
However Iriuda shows in other embodiments of Fig. 1, 4, 9 at least part of each of the plurality of plates 24 is disposed between the gas supplier 41 and the substrate holder (the part under substrate W)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to realize the plurality of plates 78 of Fig. 12 would be also disposed between the gas supplier 41 and the substrate holder so that the substrate holding part and the airflow guide part are individually formed for better airflow and gas supply (page 8).
use boron nitride instead of silicon nitride in the cavity (28, Figure
Regarding claim 2: Iriuda teaches in Page 8 wherein each of the plurality of plates is annular in shape.
Regarding claim 3: Iriuda teaches in Page 8 wherein each of the plurality of plates includes one or more crescent-shaped or arch-shaped plates.
Regarding claim 5: Iriuda teaches in Fig. 12 wherein the plurality of plates includes a plurality of plates large in diameter (the plates 78) and a plurality of plates small in diameter (portion 77) disposed alternately, and the plurality of substrates is disposed directly above the plurality of plates small in diameter (as shown).
Regarding claim 6: Iriuda teaches in Fig. 12 wherein: the substrate holder includes a plurality of props 23, and each of the plurality of plates is fixed to the plurality of props.
Regarding claim 7: Iriuda teaches in Fig. 1-4, 11wherein each of the plurality of plates is fixed between the gas supplier and the substrate holder.
Regarding claim 8: Iriduda teaches in Fig. 3 as marked below wherein the substrate holder includes a plurality of props of which respective central axes are located inward by an amount equivalent to a diameter of each of the plurality of props from an outer circumference of each of the plurality of plates and are located outside an inner circumference of each of the plurality of plates.
PNG
media_image2.png
791
1037
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11: Iridua teaches in Fig. 12, wherein each of the plurality of plates is fixed to the gas supplier.
Regarding claim 12: Iriduda teaches in Fig. 3 as marked above wherein, in horizontal sectional view, a width of each of the plurality of plates occupying between the gas supplier and a circle corresponding to a radius of gyration of the substrate holder is larger than a width of a prop of the substrate holder or a distance between the circle and an end portion of each of the plurality of substrates.
Regarding claim 13: Iridua teaches in Fig. 12 wherein each of the plurality of plates is disposed closer to a lower adjacent substrate in height than to an upper adjacent substrate among the plurality of substrates (H1 is smaller than H2 as marked).
Regarding claim 14: Iriduda teaches in Fig. 9 wherein: the substrate holder includes a plurality of props 23, each of the plurality of plates includes a movable plate (extention of 24 between 71’s) fixed to the plurality of props and a fixed plate 71 fixed to the gas supplier or the reaction tube 11, and the movable plate includes a narrow-width portion or cut-away portion enabling passage with avoidance of the fixed plate when the substrate holder is loaded into the reaction tube.
Regarding claim 15: Iriduda teaches in Fig. 8 wherein: the substrate holder includes a plurality of props 23, and each of the plurality of plates 24 has a width widening near the plurality of props.
Regarding claim 18: As explained in claims 1, 16 above, Iriuda teaches all the limitations and Iriuda further teaches in Fig. 1 about exhausting the gas supplied to the plurality of substrates (through port 51)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMED SHAMSUZZAMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1839. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7 am -4 pm 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, Fernando Toledo can be reached at 571-272-1867. 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.
/Mohammed Shamsuzzaman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights