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 Invention I, Species 1 (claims 1-5, 7-10, and 18-20) in the reply filed on is acknowledged.
Claims 6 and 11-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
a holding member in claims 1-3 and 18
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Paragraphs [0083]-[0084] of the specification indicates the holding member 240 is a ceramic shaped insert that varies in shape depending on the grooves’ shape.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
With respect to the plasma source and the gas supply unit, the 112f claim interpretation has been withdrawn since “source” is no longer considered a generic place holder in claims 1 and 7 and generic placeholder “unit” has been deleted from gas supply unit in claims 7 and 18.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-10, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ji (KR102235339B1) in view of Park et al. (KR20110077575A) and Shimada (JP10284423A).
Referring to Figure 2 and paragraphs [0041]-[0057], Ji disclose a substrate treating apparatus comprising: a housing 100 defining a treating space (pars.[0043]-[0044]); a support 300 configured to support a substate within the treating space (par.[0045]); and a plasma source 310, 350, 620 configured to generate a plasma by exciting a gas supplied to the treating space (pars.[0047]-[0049]), and wherein the support unit 300 includes: a chuck 310 with a top surface configured to hold a substrate; and a ring member 330 in a ring shape surrounding an outer side of the chuck (par.[0045], [0048])
Ji is silent on a ring member including a first cut surface which divides the ring member into at least a first portion and a second portion, the ring member defining a first groove within the first portion and the second portion on both sides of the first cut surface, and a holding member selectively insertable into the first groove, the holding member being configured to hold the first portion and the second portion.
Referring to Figures 2-3, abstract, and page 3, Park et al. teach a substrate treating apparatus wherein a ring member 30 including a first cut surface which divides the ring member into at least a first portion 34 and a second portion 36, the ring member defining a first groove 35 within the first portion and the second portion on both sides of the first cut surface, and a holding member 37 selectively insertable into the first groove, the holding member being configured to hold the first portion and the second portion since it is used to promote plasma uniformity. Additionally, referring to Figures 1-2 and page 3, Shimada teach a substrate treating apparatus wherein a holding member 31 is used between ring members 11, 21 in order to improve the air tightness between the ring members. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the apparatus of Ji with a ring member including a first cut surface which divides the ring member into at least a first portion and a second portion, the ring member defining a first groove within the first portion and the second portion on both sides of the first cut surface, and a holding member selectively insertable into the first groove, the holding member being configured to hold the first portion and the second portion as taught by Park et al. and Shimada since it would promote plasma uniformity and provide airtightness at the cut surface. The resulting apparatus of Ji in view of Park et al. and Shimada would yield a ring member including a first cut surface which divides the ring member into at least a first portion and a second portion, the ring member defining a first groove within the first portion and the second portion on both sides of the first cut surface, and a holding member selectively insertable into the first groove, the holding member being configured to hold the first portion and the second portion.
PNG
media_image1.png
438
645
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
277
486
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 2, the substrate treating apparatus of Ji in view of Park et al. and Shimada further includes wherein a groove at which the holding member 37 is inserted is formed at the ring member 34 (Park et al.-Fig. 3).
With respect to claim 3, the substrate treating apparatus of Ji in view of Park et al. and Shimada further includes wherein the first groove is defined at an inner side of the ring member, and a top end of the first groove is lower than a top end of the ring member 34, and a bottom end of the first groove is higher than a bottom end of the ring member (Park et al.-Fig. 3, Shimada-Fig. 2).
With respect to claim 4, the substrate treating apparatus of Ji in view of Park et al. and Shimada further includes wherein the ring member 34 is divided with respect to the cut surface, and the holding member 37 is configured to limit a movement in a lengthwise direction of the first portion and the second portion when the holding member is inserted into the first groove 35 (Park et al.-Fig. 3, Shimada-Fig. 2).
With respect to claim 5, the substrate treating apparatus of Ji in view of Park et al. and Shimada further includes wherein the first cut surface is defined in a horizontally oriented direction relative to the first cut surface of the ring member 34, 36 (Park et al.-Fig. 3). .
With respect to claim 7, the substrate treating apparatus of Ji in view of Park et al. and Shimada further comprising: a dielectric plate 500 facing a top surface of the substrate supported on the support 300 (par.[0052]); and a gas supply 700 configured to supply a gas to an edge region of the substrate (par.[0055]), and wherein the plasma source includes: a top edge electrode 620 above the edge region; and a bottom edge 350 electrode below the edge region (Ji-par.[0053]).
With respect to claim 8, the substrate treating apparatus of Ji in view of Park et al. and Shimada further includes wherein the bottom edge electrode 350 is formed in a ring shape, and surrounds an outer side of the ring member 330 (Ji-par.[0049]).
With respect to claim 9, the substrate treating apparatus of Ji in view of Park et al. and Shimada further includes wherein the chuck 310 and the ring member 330 share a same center, and an inner side of the ring member contacts the outer side of the chuck (Ji-Figure 2).
With respect to claim 10, the substrate treating apparatus of Ji in view of Park et al. and Shimada further includes wherein the chuck and the ring member have a different thermal expansion rate from one another (i.e. chuck-conductor, ring member-insulator, Ji-par.[0048])).
With respect to claim 18, referring to Figure 2 and paragraphs [0041]-[0057], Ji disclose a substrate treating apparatus comprising: a housing 100 defining a treating space (pars.[0043]-[0044]); a support 300 configured to support a substate within the treating space (par.[0045]); a dielectric plate facing a top surface of a substrate supported on the support unit; (par.[0052]); and a gas supply 700 configured to supply a gas to an edge region of the substrate (par.[0055]); a top edge electrode 620 above the edge region (par.[0053]); and a bottom edge electrode 350 below the edge region (par.[0053]), and wherein the support 300 includes: a chuck 310 with a top surface holding the substrate; and a ring member 330 in a ring shape surrounding an outer side of the chuck (par.[0045], [0048]).
Ji is silent on the ring member includes: a cut surface which divides into at least a first portion and a second portion; the ring member defining a groove within the first portion and the second portion on both sides of the cut surface; and a holding member selectively insertable into the groove, the holding member being configured to limit a movement in a lengthwise direction of the ring member.
Referring to Figures 2-3, abstract, and page 3, Park et al. teach a substrate treating apparatus the ring member 30 includes: a cut surface which divides the ring member 34, 36 into at least a first portion 34 and a second portion 36; the ring member defining a groove within the first portion and the second portion on both sides of the cut surface; and a holding member 37 selectively insertable into the groove, the holding member being configured to limit a movement in a lengthwise direction of the ring member since it is used to promote plasma uniformity. Additionally, referring to Figures 1-2 and page 3, Shimada teach a substrate treating apparatus wherein a holding member 31 is used between ring members 11, 21 in order to improve the air tightness between the ring members. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the apparatus of Ji with the ring member includes: a cut surface which divides into at least a first portion and a second portion; the ring member defining a groove within the first portion and the second portion on both sides of the cut surface; and a holding member selectively insertable into the groove, the holding member being configured to limit a movement in a lengthwise direction of the ring member as taught by Park et al. and Shimada since it would promote plasma uniformity and provide airtightness at the cut surface. The resulting apparatus of Ji in view of Park et al. and Shimada would yield the ring member includes: a cut surface which divides into at least a first portion and a second portion; the ring member defining a groove within the first portion and the second portion on both sides of the cut surface; and a holding member selectively insertable into the groove, the holding member being configured to limit a movement in a lengthwise direction of the ring member.
With respect to claim 19, the substrate treating apparatus of Ji in view of Park et al. and Shimada further includes wherein the chuck 310 and the ring member 330 share a same center, and an inner side of the ring member contacts the outer side of the chuck (Ji-Fig. 2) and the groove is defined at the inner side between a top end of the ring member 34 and a bottom end of the ring member 34 (Park et al.-Fig. 3).
With respect to claim 20, the substrate treating apparatus of Ji in view of Park et al. and Shimada further includes wherein the chuck and the ring member have a different thermal expansion rate from one another (i.e. chuck-conductor, ring member-insulator, Ji-par.[0048])).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because new ground of rejection Ji in view of Park et al. and Shimada teach "the ring member including a first cut surface which divides the ring member into at least a first portion and a second portion, the ring member defining a first groove within the first portion and the second portion on both sides of the first cut surface" and "a holding member selectively insertable into the first groove," as recited in claim 1. Additionally, Applicant has argued that the certain features are not disclosed by the prior art and the previous office action. However, applicant has failed to argue the specifics of the examiner’s office action and to provide evidence to support applicant’s arguments. Therefore, it must be emphasized that arguments of counsel alone cannot take the place of evidence in the record once an examiner has advanced a reasonable basis for questioning the disclosure. See In re Budnick, 537 F.2d at 538,190 USPQ at 424; In re Schulze, 346 F.2d 600, 145 USPQ 716 (CCPA 1965); In re Cole, 326 F.2d 769, 140 USPQ 230 (CCPA 1964).
Conclusion
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 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.
/Michelle CROWELL/Examiner, Art Unit 1716
/SYLVIA MACARTHUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights