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 of claims 1-9 and 16-20 in the reply filed on January 27, 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “a nozzle (Applicant’s 108; Figure 3A) in a plasma chamber (Not shown by Applicants)” – the nozzle is the plasma chamber. Further, the below noted elements are not shown in the as-filed drawings must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: Some of the below noted drawing objections do not have antecedence with the as-filed specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4-6, 9, 16-18, 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shinriki, Hiroshi et al. (US 20050208217 A1). Shinriki teaches a plasma processing apparatus (Figure 1A) comprising: a plasma generation source (12; Figure 1A-Not shown by Applicants); a nozzle (10+13; Figure 1A; [0182]-[0184]-Applicant’s 108; Figure 3A) in a plasma chamber (1; Figure 1A; [0181]-Not shown by Applicants), the nozzle (10+13; Figure 1A; [0182]-[0184]-Applicant’s 108; Figure 3A) being able to direct plasma from the plasma generation source (12; Figure 1A-Not shown by Applicants) to a wafer (15; Figure 1A-[0182]-Applicant’s 126) that is to be processed, the plasma having the form of a plasma stream at an exit of the nozzle (10+13; Figure 1A; [0182]-[0184]-Applicant’s 108; Figure 3A);a gas shroud (all above 4; Figure 1A-Applicant’s 110; Figure 3A,B) disposed in the plasma chamber (1; Figure 1A; [0181]-Not shown by Applicants) and over the wafer (15; Figure 1A-[0182]-Applicant’s 126), the gas shroud (all above 4; Figure 1A-Applicant’s 110; Figure 3A,B) surrounding the nozzle (10+13; Figure 1A; [0182]-[0184]-Applicant’s 108; Figure 3A), the gas shroud (all above 4; Figure 1A-Applicant’s 110; Figure 3A,B) comprising: a first circular opening (18; Figure 1A; [0190]-not shown by Applicants) in a top surface of the gas shroud (all above 4; Figure 1A-Applicant’s 110; Figure 3A,B); a second circular opening (14; Figure 1A; [0080]-not shown by Applicants) in a bottommost surface of the gas shroud (all above 4; Figure 1A-Applicant’s 110; Figure 3A,B), the nozzle (10+13; Figure 1A; [0182]-[0184]-Applicant’s 108; Figure 3A) being disposed in the first circular opening (18; Figure 1A; [0190]-not shown by Applicants) and the second circular opening (14; Figure 1A; [0080]-not shown by Applicants); and a gas plenum (3-containing gas in each 21; Figure 1A; [0069]-Applicant’s 116; Figure 3A,B) configured to be maintained at a first pressure (pressure at 21; Figure 1A-“conductane”; throughout), a first region (corresponding “first region” of Figure 1A bounded by 143 and 15; Applicant’s 128) between the second circular opening (14; Figure 1A; [0080]-not shown by Applicants) and a top surface of the wafer (15; Figure 1A-[0182]-Applicant’s 126) being configured to be maintained at a second pressure (pressure at 22; Figure 1A-“inside the reaction chamber”; [0176]; 0.1Torr<P<10Torr), the first pressure (pressure at 21; Figure 1A-“conductane”; throughout) and the second pressure (pressure at 22; Figure 1A-“inside the reaction chamber”; [0176]; 0.1Torr<P<10Torr) being different, as claimed by claim 1. The Examiner notes that the claimed relative pressures must be taught by Shinriki for Shinriki’s process gas to flow as described.
Shinriki further teaches:
The plasma processing apparatus (Figure 1A) of claim 1, wherein the first pressure (pressure at 21; Figure 1A-“conductane”; throughout) is larger than the second pressure (pressure at 22; Figure 1A-“inside the reaction chamber”; [0176]; 0.1Torr<P<10Torr), as claimed by claim 2. As notes above, the claimed relative pressures must be taught by Shinriki for Shinriki’s process gas to flow as described.
The plasma processing apparatus (Figure 1A) of claim 1, further comprising orifices (21; Figure 1A; [0087], [0192]) that directly connect and allow flow of gas between the gas plenum (3-containing gas in each 21; Figure 1A; [0069]-Applicant’s 116; Figure 3A,B) and the first region (corresponding “first region” of Figure 1A bounded by 143 and 15; Applicant’s 128), as claimed by claim 4
The plasma processing apparatus (Figure 1A) of claim 4, wherein the orifices (21; Figure 1A; [0087], [0192]) are arranged in the form of a ring pattern (required for the claimed “diameter” geometry; [0208]-[0209]), the ring pattern (required for the claimed “diameter” geometry; [0208]-[0209]) being disposed around the second circular opening (14; Figure 1A; [0080]-not shown by Applicants), as claimed by claim 5
The plasma processing apparatus (Figure 1A) of claim 5, wherein the flow of gas between the gas plenum (3-containing gas in each 21; Figure 1A; [0069]-Applicant’s 116; Figure 3A,B) and the first region (corresponding “first region” of Figure 1A bounded by 143 and 15; Applicant’s 128) through the orifices (21; Figure 1A; [0087], [0192]) is in the form of jets of the gas, and wherein the jets of the gas surround the plasma stream, as claimed by claim 6. Applicant has not provided sufficient distinguishing structural characteristics of Applicant's claimed invention to contrast the Examiner's cited prior art. When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Examer notes MPEP 2112 which states the express, implicit, and inherent disclosures of a prior art reference may be relied upon in the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. "The inherent teaching of a prior art reference, a question of fact, arises both in the context of anticipation and obviousness." In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613, 34 USPQ2d 1782, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (affirmed a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection based in part on inherent disclosure in one of the references). See also In re Grasselli, 713 F.2d 731, 739, 218 USPQ 769, 775 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
The plasma processing apparatus (Figure 1A) of claim 1, wherein the plasma stream has a lateral width that is in a range from 2 mm to 20 mm, the lateral width being a width between outermost points of the plasma stream that are in physical contact with the top surface of the wafer (15; Figure 1A-[0182]-Applicant’s 126), as claimed by claim 9. The Examiner notes that the claimed dimensions are not related to the claimed structure for the pending apparatus claims and are thus considered intended use claim recitations for the pending apparatus claims. Further, it has been held that claim language that simply specifies an intended use or field of use for the invention generally will not limit the scope of a claim (Walter , 618 F.2d at 769, 205 USPQ at 409; MPEP 2106). Additionally, in apparatus claims, intended use must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim (In re Casey,152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto , 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); MPEP2115).
An apparatus (Figure 1A) comprising: a radical source (12; Figure 1A); a nozzle (10+13; Figure 1A; [0182]-[0184]-Applicant’s 108; Figure 3A) configured to deliver radicals from the radical source (12; Figure 1A) into a processing chamber (1; Figure 1A); a gas shroud (all above 4; Figure 1A-Applicant’s 110; Figure 3A,B) disposed over a wafer (15; Figure 1A-[0182]-Applicant’s 126) to be processed in the processing chamber (1; Figure 1A), the gas shroud (all above 4; Figure 1A-Applicant’s 110; Figure 3A,B) comprising: a first opening (gas entry at 2; Figure 1A; not shown by Applicants) in a topmost surface of the gas shroud (all above 4; Figure 1A-Applicant’s 110; Figure 3A,B); a second opening (top of 3; Figure 1A; not shown by Applicants) in a bottommost surface of the gas shroud (all above 4; Figure 1A-Applicant’s 110; Figure 3A,B), a first region (corresponding “first region” of Figure 1A bounded by 143 and 15; Applicant’s 128) being disposed between the second opening (top of 3; Figure 1A; not shown by Applicants) and a top surface of the wafer (15; Figure 1A-[0182]-Applicant’s 126); a gas plenum (3-containing gas in each 21; Figure 1A; [0069]-Applicant’s 116; Figure 3A,B); and first orifices (21; Figure 1A; [0087], [0192]) arranged in the form of a ring pattern (required for the claimed “diameter” geometry; [0208]-[0209]) around the second opening (top of 3; Figure 1A; not shown by Applicants), the first orifices (21; Figure 1A; [0087], [0192]) acting as a conduit for gas flow between the gas plenum (3-containing gas in each 21; Figure 1A; [0069]-Applicant’s 116; Figure 3A,B) and the first region (corresponding “first region” of Figure 1A bounded by 143 and 15; Applicant’s 128), an exit of the nozzle (10+13; Figure 1A; [0182]-[0184]-Applicant’s 108; Figure 3A) being disposed in the first region (corresponding “first region” of Figure 1A bounded by 143 and 15; Applicant’s 128) and being above the wafer (15; Figure 1A-[0182]-Applicant’s 126), the nozzle (10+13; Figure 1A; [0182]-[0184]-Applicant’s 108; Figure 3A) extending through the first opening (gas entry at 2; Figure 1A; not shown by Applicants), the second opening (top of 3; Figure 1A; not shown by Applicants), and the gas shroud (all above 4; Figure 1A-Applicant’s 110; Figure 3A,B), as claimed by claim 16
The apparatus (Figure 1A) of claim 16, wherein the gas shroud (all above 4; Figure 1A-Applicant’s 110; Figure 3A,B) further comprises a gas inlet (16; Figure 1A), an inert gas being supplied to the gas plenum (3-containing gas in each 21; Figure 1A; [0069]-Applicant’s 116; Figure 3A,B) through the gas inlet (16; Figure 1A) to maintain the gas plenum (3-containing gas in each 21; Figure 1A; [0069]-Applicant’s 116; Figure 3A,B) at a first pressure (pressure at 21; Figure 1A-“conductane”; throughout), and a gas outlet (19; Figure 1A) connected to a vacuum pump (“DRY”; Figure 1A) to remove unused radicals and contaminants from the gas shroud (all above 4; Figure 1A-Applicant’s 110; Figure 3A,B), as claimed by claim 17. The above italicized claim text is considered to a recitation of intended use in the pending apparatus claims.
The apparatus (Figure 1A) of claim 17, wherein the first region (corresponding “first region” of Figure 1A bounded by 143 and 15; Applicant’s 128) is maintained at a second pressure (pressure at 22; Figure 1A-“inside the reaction chamber”; [0176]; 0.1Torr<P<10Torr), the first pressure (pressure at 21; Figure 1A-“conductane”; throughout) being higher than the second pressure (pressure at 22; Figure 1A-“inside the reaction chamber”; [0176]; 0.1Torr<P<10Torr), as claimed by claim 18. The Examiner notes that the claimed relative pressures must be taught by Shinriki for Shinriki’s process gas to flow as described.
A plasma processing apparatus (Figure 1A) comprising: a plasma generation source (12; Figure 1A-Not shown by Applicants); a wafer (15; Figure 1A-[0182]-Applicant’s 126) chuck (8; Figure 1A) in a processing chamber (1; Figure 1A), the wafer (15; Figure 1A-[0182]-Applicant’s 126) chuck (8; Figure 1A) configured to support a wafer (15; Figure 1A-[0182]-Applicant’s 126) to be processed; a gas shroud (all above 4; Figure 1A-Applicant’s 110; Figure 3A,B) over the wafer (15; Figure 1A-[0182]-Applicant’s 126) and in the processing chamber (1; Figure 1A); a nozzle (10+13; Figure 1A; [0182]-[0184]-Applicant’s 108; Figure 3A) extending through the gas shroud (all above 4; Figure 1A-Applicant’s 110; Figure 3A,B) and configured to direct plasma from the plasma generation source (12; Figure 1A-Not shown by Applicants) to the wafer (15; Figure 1A-[0182]-Applicant’s 126), the plasma having the form of a plasma stream at an exit of the nozzle (10+13; Figure 1A; [0182]-[0184]-Applicant’s 108; Figure 3A), wherein the gas shroud (all above 4; Figure 1A-Applicant’s 110; Figure 3A,B) comprises; a first circular opening (18; Figure 1A; [0190]-not shown by Applicants) in a top surface of the gas shroud (all above 4; Figure 1A-Applicant’s 110; Figure 3A,B); and a second circular opening (14; Figure 1A; [0080]-not shown by Applicants) in a bottommost surface of the gas shroud (all above 4; Figure 1A-Applicant’s 110; Figure 3A,B), the nozzle (10+13; Figure 1A; [0182]-[0184]-Applicant’s 108; Figure 3A) extending through the first circular opening (18; Figure 1A; [0190]-not shown by Applicants) and the second circular opening (14; Figure 1A; [0080]-not shown by Applicants), wherein a diameter of the second circular opening (14; Figure 1A; [0080]-not shown by Applicants) is larger than a diameter of the first circular opening (18; Figure 1A; [0190]-not shown by Applicants), as claimed by claim 21
The plasma processing apparatus (Figure 1A) of claim 21, wherein the gas shroud (all above 4; Figure 1A-Applicant’s 110; Figure 3A,B) further comprises: a gas plenum (3-containing gas in each 21; Figure 1A; [0069]-Applicant’s 116; Figure 3A,B) configured to be maintained at a first pressure (pressure at 21; Figure 1A-“conductane”; throughout), a first region (corresponding “first region” of Figure 1A bounded by 143 and 15; Applicant’s 128) between the second circular opening (14; Figure 1A; [0080]-not shown by Applicants) and a top surface of the wafer (15; Figure 1A-[0182]-Applicant’s 126) being configured to be maintained at a second pressure (pressure at 22; Figure 1A-“inside the reaction chamber”; [0176]; 0.1Torr<P<10Torr), the first pressure (pressure at 21; Figure 1A-“conductane”; throughout) and the second pressure (pressure at 22; Figure 1A-“inside the reaction chamber”; [0176]; 0.1Torr<P<10Torr) being different, as claimed by claim 22. The Examiner notes that the claimed relative pressures must be taught by Shinriki for Shinriki’s process gas to flow as described.
The plasma processing apparatus (Figure 1A) of claim 23, further comprising orifices (21; Figure 1A; [0087], [0192]) that directly connect and allow flow of gas between the gas plenum (3-containing gas in each 21; Figure 1A; [0069]-Applicant’s 116; Figure 3A,B) and the first region (corresponding “first region” of Figure 1A bounded by 143 and 15; Applicant’s 128), as claimed by claim 24
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 3, 7, 8, 19, 20, 25, 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shinriki, Hiroshi et al. (US 20050208217 A1) in view of Hassan; Vinayak Vishwanath et al. (US 20220122821 A1). Shinriki further teaches:
the second pressure (pressure at 22; Figure 1A-“inside the reaction chamber”; [0176]; 0.1Torr<P<10Torr) is in a range from o.1 torr to 5.0 torr – claim 3
The apparatus (Figure 1A) of claim 19, further comprising: second orifices (outside the first orifices 21; Figure 1A; [0087], [0192]) arranged in the form of a ring pattern (required for the claimed “diameter” geometry; [0208]-[0209]) around the first orifices (21; Figure 1A; [0087], [0192]), the second orifices (outside the first orifices 21; Figure 1A; [0087], [0192]) acting as a conduit for gas flow between the gas plenum (3-containing gas in each 21; Figure 1A; [0069]-Applicant’s 116; Figure 3A,B) and a second region, wherein the second region surrounds and is adjacent to the first region (corresponding “first region” of Figure 1A bounded by 143 and 15; Applicant’s 128), wherein the gas flow in the second orifices (outside the first orifices 21; Figure 1A; [0087], [0192]) between the gas plenum (3-containing gas in each 21; Figure 1A; [0069]-Applicant’s 116; Figure 3A,B) and the second region is in the form of second jets of gas, and wherein the second region has a pressure (“conductance”; throughout) that is different from the first pressure (pressure at 21; Figure 1A-“conductane”; throughout) and the second pressure (pressure at 22; Figure 1A-“inside the reaction chamber”; [0176]; 0.1Torr<P<10Torr) – claim 20. The Examiner notes that the claimed relative pressures must be taught by Shinriki for Shinriki’s process gas to flow as described.
Shinriki does not teach:
The plasma processing apparatus (Figure 1A) of claim 1, wherein the first pressure (pressure at 21; Figure 1A-“conductane”; throughout) is in a range from 1.0 torr to 50.0 torr – claim 3
The plasma processing apparatus (Figure 1A) of claim 6, wherein the jets of the gas travel at a speed that is equal to the speed of sound, as claimed by claim 7
The plasma processing apparatus (Figure 1A) of claim 7, wherein each of the orifices (21; Figure 1A; [0087], [0192]) has a diameter that is in a range from 0.3 mm to 2.0 mm, as claimed by claim 8
The apparatus (Figure 1A) of claim 18, wherein the gas flow in the first orifices (21; Figure 1A; [0087], [0192]) between the gas plenum (3-containing gas in each 21; Figure 1A; [0069]-Applicant’s 116; Figure 3A,B) and the first region (corresponding “first region” of Figure 1A bounded by 143 and 15; Applicant’s 128) is in the form of first jets of gas, and wherein the first jets of gas travel at a speed equal to the speed of sound, as claimed by claim 19
wherein the second jets of gas travel at a speed equal to the speed of sound, wherein the second jets of gas travel in a direction that leads away from the nozzle (10+13; Figure 1A; [0182]-[0184]-Applicant’s 108; Figure 3A) – claim 20
The plasma processing apparatus (Figure 1A) of claim 24, wherein each of the orifices (21; Figure 1A; [0087], [0192]) has a diameter that is in a range from 0.3 mm to 2.0 mm, as claimed by claim 25
The plasma processing apparatus (Figure 1A) of claim 21, wherein the gas shroud (all above 4; Figure 1A-Applicant’s 110; Figure 3A,B) and the nozzle (10+13; Figure 1A; [0182]-[0184]-Applicant’s 108; Figure 3A) both comprise the same material, as claimed by claim 26
Hassan also teaches a remote plasma processing apparatus (Figure 2) including a gas shroud (Figure 3A) having orifices accommodating dimensions permitting flow velocities “substantially equal to Mach 1” ([0110]-[0111]). Hassan also teaches chamber components made from aluminum ([0018],[0022]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Shinriki to optimize Shinriki’s apparatus dimension(s) and materials of construction.
Motivation for Shinriki to optimize Shinriki’s apparatus dimension(s) and materials of construction is for at least optimizing process “parameters or constraints” as taught by Hassan ([0105]). Further, motivation for Shinriki to use optimized materials for Shinriki’s apparatus is for desired materials as taught by Hassan ([0018],[0022]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Remote plasma apparatus including similar gas injection and exhaust include US 20210087686 A1; US 20150361553 A1; US 20130267045 A1; US 20120145078 A1; US 6287980 B1; US 7408225 B2; US 20080054472 A1; US 20070264427 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Rudy Zervigon whose telephone number is (571) 272- 1442. The examiner can normally be reached on a Monday through Thursday schedule from 8am through 6pm EST. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Any Inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the Chemical and Materials Engineering art unit receptionist at (571) 272-1700. If the examiner cannot be reached please contact the examiner's supervisor, Parviz Hassanzadeh, at (571) 272- 1435.
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:/Awww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571) 272-1000.
/Rudy Zervigon/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716