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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-11 and 18-20, in the reply filed on January 20, 2025 is acknowledged.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6 and 18-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Im et al, US 2011/0197812 A1.
Im et al teaches:
Regarding claim 1, a thin film deposition system 200, comprising: a deposition chamber 180 comprising an inlet (pipe connecting precursor conduit 123, 123a and showerhead 184), wherein the inlet is configured to direct a precursor into the deposition chamber 180 in a first direction (vertical); a precursor source 140 container containing a precursor source Sb; and a precursor conduit 123, 123a, wherein the precursor conduit 123, 123a is straight and elongated extending between a proximate end and a distal end along a second direction (horizontal), and wherein the proximate end is directly coupled to an outlet of the precursor source container 140 via pipe 142, and the distal end is directly coupled to the inlet (pipe connecting precursor conduit 123, 123a and showerhead 184) of the deposition chamber, wherein the first direction is different from the second direction. (Figure 2)
Regarding claim 2, the first direction (vertical) is substantially perpendicular to the second direction (horizontal). (Figure 2)
Regarding claim 3, the precursor conduit extends substantially horizontally. (Figure 2)
Regarding claim 4, a primary valve VAL3 installed at a downstream section of the precursor conduit, wherein the primary valve is switched off when a semiconductor fabrication process performed in the deposition chamber is completed.
Regarding claim 5, the semiconductor fabrication process is an atomic layer deposition (ALD) process. (Paragraph 0017)
Regarding claim 6, the outlet 142 of the precursor source container 140 is configured to direct the precursor Sb into the precursor conduit 123, 123a in a third direction (vertical), and the third direction is different from the second direction (horizontal). (Figure 2)
Regarding claim 18, a thin film deposition system 200, comprising: a deposition chamber 180 comprising an inlet (pipe connecting precursor conduit 123, 123a and showerhead 184) extending along a first direction (vertical); a precursor source container 140 comprising an outlet 152 and figured to accommodate a precursor source Sb; a precursor conduit 123, 123a extending along a second direction (horizontal) different from the first direction (vertical) and coupled between the precursor source container 140 and the deposition chamber 180, wherein the precursor conduit 123, 123a is elongated and straight and comprises a proximate end directly coupled to the outlet 142 of the precursor source container 140 and a distal end directly coupled to the inlet (pipe connecting precursor conduit 123, 123a and showerhead 184) of the deposition chamber 180; and a primary valve VAL3 installed at a downstream section of the precursor conduit 123, 123a, wherein the primary valve VAL3 is switched off when a semiconductor fabrication process performed in the deposition chamber is completed, wherein the outlet 142 of the precursor source container 140 extends along a third direction (vertical) different from the second direction (horizontal).
Regarding claim 19, the precursor conduit 123, 123a is elongated and extends substantially horizontally between a proximate end and a distal end, and wherein the proximate end is coupled to the outlet 142 of the precursor source container 140, and the distal end is coupled to the inlet (pipe connecting precursor conduit 123, 123a and showerhead 184) of the deposition chamber 180.
Regarding claim 20, the first direction (vertical) is substantially parallel to the third direction (vertical).
Regarding claim 21, a thin film deposition system 100, comprising: a deposition chamber 180; a precursor source container 140 containing a precursor source Sb; and a precursor conduit 123, coupled between the deposition chamber 180 and the precursor source container 140, wherein the precursor conduit 123, consists of a single straight elongated segment comprising a proximate end directly coupled to an outlet 142 of the precursor source container 123 and a distal end directly coupled to an inlet (pipe connecting precursor conduit 123, 123a and showerhead 184) of the deposition chamber 180, wherein the outlet 142 of the precursor source container 140 extends along a first direction (vertical), the precursor conduit 123 extends along a second direction (horizontal), and the first direction is different from the second direction. (Figure 1)
Regarding claim 22, the inlet (pipe connecting precursor conduit 123, 123a and showerhead 184) of the deposition chamber 180 extends along a third direction (vertical), and the third direction is different from the second direction.
Regarding claim 23, the precursor conduit 123 extends substantially horizontally.
Regarding claim 24, wherein the first direction (vertical) is substantially perpendicular to the second direction (horizontal).
Regarding claim 25, the third direction (vertical) is substantially perpendicular to the second direction (horizontal).
Regarding claim 26, the first direction (vertical) is substantially parallel to the third direction (vertical).
Claims 1, 2, 4-6, and 18, 20-22, and 24-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as anticipated by Sangplug et al, US 2024/0003008 A1.
Sangplug et al teaches:
Regarding claim 1, a thin film deposition system 100, comprising: a deposition chamber 103 comprising an inlet (pipe connecting precursor conduit 187 and showerhead 104), wherein the inlet is configured to direct a precursor into the deposition chamber 103 in a first direction (horizontal); a precursor source 190 container containing a precursor source; and a precursor conduit 187, wherein the precursor conduit 187 is straight and elongated extending between a proximate end and a distal end along a second direction (vertical), and wherein the proximate end is directly coupled to an outlet 197 of the precursor source container 190, and the distal end is directly coupled to the inlet (pipe connecting precursor conduit 187 and showerhead 104) of the deposition chamber, wherein the first direction is different from the second direction. (Figure 1)
Regarding claim 2, the first direction (horizontal) is substantially perpendicular to the second direction (vertical). (Figure 1)
Regarding claim 4, a primary valve 194 installed at a downstream section of the precursor conduit 187, wherein the primary valve is switched off when a semiconductor fabrication process performed in the deposition chamber is completed.
Regarding claim 5, the semiconductor fabrication process is an atomic layer deposition (ALD) process. (Paragraph 0002)
Regarding claim 6, the outlet 197 of the precursor source container 190 is configured to direct the precursor into the precursor conduit 187 in a third direction (horizontal), and the third direction is different from the second direction (vertical). (Figure 1)
Regarding claim 18, a thin film deposition system 100, comprising: a deposition chamber 103 comprising an inlet (pipe connecting precursor conduit 187 and showerhead 104) extending along a first direction (horizontal); a precursor source container 190 comprising an outlet 197 and figured to accommodate a precursor source; a precursor conduit 187 extending along a second direction (vertical) different from the first direction (horizontal) and coupled between the precursor source container 190 and the deposition chamber 103, wherein the precursor conduit 187 is elongated and straight and comprises a proximate end directly coupled to the outlet 197 of the precursor source container 190 and a distal end directly coupled to the inlet (pipe connecting precursor conduit 187 and showerhead 104) of the deposition chamber 103; and a primary valve 194 installed at a downstream section of the precursor conduit 187 wherein the primary valve 194 is switched off when a semiconductor fabrication process performed in the deposition chamber is completed, wherein the outlet 197 of the precursor source container 190 extends along a third direction (horizontal) different from the second direction (vertical).
Regarding claim 20, the first direction (horizontal) is substantially parallel to the third direction (horizontal).
Regarding claim 21, a thin film deposition system 100, comprising: a deposition chamber 103; a precursor source container 190 containing a precursor source; and a precursor conduit 187, coupled between the deposition chamber 103 and the precursor source container 190, wherein the precursor conduit 187, consists of a single straight elongated segment (segment between valve 194 and inlet comprising a proximate end directly coupled to an outlet (outlet of valve 194) of the precursor source container 190 and a distal end directly coupled to an inlet (pipe connecting precursor conduit 187 and showerhead 104) of the deposition chamber 103, wherein the outlet of the precursor source container 190 extends along a first direction (horizontal), the precursor conduit 187 extends along a second direction (vertical), and the first direction is different from the second direction. (Figure 1)
Regarding claim 22, the inlet (pipe connecting precursor conduit 187 and showerhead 104) of the deposition chamber 103 extends along a third direction (horizontal), and the third direction is different from the second direction.
Regarding claim 24, wherein the first direction (horizontal) is substantially perpendicular to the second direction (vertical).
Regarding claim 25, the third direction (horizontal) is substantially perpendicular to the second direction (vertical).
Regarding claim 26, the first direction (horizontal) is substantially parallel to the third direction (horizontal).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claims 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Im et al, US 2011/0197812 A1, in view of Kesala, US 20010042523 A1.
Im et al was discussed above.
Im et al differs from the present invention in that Im et al does not teach:
Regarding claim 7, a first pressure sensor configured to measure a first pressure at an upstream side of the primary valve; and a second pressure sensor configured to measure a second pressure at a downstream side of the primary valve; and wherein the primary valve is switched off when the second pressure is higher than the first pressure.
Regarding claim 8, a supplemental carrier gas conduit coupled to the precursor conduit at a joint, wherein supplemental carrier gas is delivered to the precursor conduit through the supplemental carrier gas conduit, and the joint is disposed between the primary valve and the outlet of the precursor source container.
Regarding claim 9, a pressure of the supplemental carrier gas in the supplemental carrier gas conduit is higher than an atmosphere (atm).
Regarding claim 10, a carrier gas source configured to provide a carrier gas; and a mass flow controller in gas communication with the carrier gas source and the precursor source container; and wherein the mass flow controller is further coupled to the supplemental carrier gas conduit and configured to adjust the pressure of the supplemental carrier gas in the supplemental carrier gas conduit.
Kesala teaches:
PNG
media_image1.png
682
773
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, a first pressure sensor configured to measure a first pressure at an upstream side of the primary valve; and a second pressure sensor configured to measure a second pressure at a downstream side of the primary valve (See Figure 2 above).
Regarding claim 8, a supplemental carrier gas conduit coupled to the precursor conduit, wherein supplemental carrier gas is delivered to the precursor conduit through the supplemental carrier gas conduit. (See Figure 2 above)
Regarding claim 9, a pressure of the supplemental carrier gas in the supplemental carrier gas conduit is higher than an atmosphere (atm). The specific pressure the supplemental carrier gas is supplied is an intended use of the apparatus. It has been held that: “Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does” (Emphasis in original) Hewlett-Packard Co. V. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990); and 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). Also see MPEP 2114. The apparatus of Kesala teaches all of the claimed structure and is capable of functioning in the claimed manner. Thus the limitation does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from Kesala.
Regarding claim 10, a carrier gas source configured to provide a carrier gas; and a mass flow controller in gas communication with the carrier gas source and the precursor source container; and wherein the mass flow controller is further coupled to the supplemental carrier gas conduit and configured to adjust the pressure of the supplemental carrier gas in the supplemental carrier gas conduit. (See Figure 2 above)
The motivation for adding the pressure sensors, carrier gas, mass flow controller, and carrier gas conduit to the apparatus of Im et al is to detect the pressure in the precursor conduit and to supply and control the flow of a carrier gas to the precursor conduit as taught by Kesala. Furthermore, it has been held that applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results is obvious (see KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to add the pressure sensors, carrier gas, mass flow controller, and carrier gas conduit to the apparatus of Im et al as taught by Kesala.
Regarding claim 7, the limitation “wherein the primary valve is switched off when the second pressure is higher than the first pressure” is an intended use of the apparatus. It has been held that: “Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does” (Emphasis in original) Hewlett-Packard Co. V. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990); and 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). Also see MPEP 2114. The apparatus of Im et al and Kesala teaches all of the claimed structure and is capable of functioning in the claimed manner. Thus the limitation does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from Im et al and Kesala.
Regarding claim 9, the specific pressure the supplemental carrier gas is supplied is an intended use of the apparatus. It has been held that: “Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does” (Emphasis in original) Hewlett-Packard Co. V. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990); and 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). Also see MPEP 2114. The apparatus of Im et al and Kesala teaches all of the claimed structure and is capable of functioning in the claimed manner. Thus the limitation does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from Im et al and Kesala.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mi et al and Kesala as applied to claims 7-10 above, and further in view of Morozumi et al, TW 201245485 A.
Mi et al and Kesala differs from the present invention in that they do not teach a compressor configured to increase the pressure of the supplemental carrier gas in the supplemental carrier gas conduit.
Morozumi et al teaches a compressor 32b configured to increase the pressure of the carrier gas in the carrier gas conduit 32.
The motivation for adding the compressor of Morozumi et al to the supplemental carrier gas conduit of Mi et al and Kesala is to increase the pressure of the supplemental carrier gas in the supplemental carrier gas conduit as taught by Morozumi et al. Furthermore, it has been held that applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results is obvious (see KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to add the compressor of Morozumi et al to the supplemental carrier gas conduit of Mi et al and Kesala as taught by Morozumi et al.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed May 6, 2026, with respect to the rejections of record have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection made in view of Im et al, US 2011/0197812 A1, and Sangplug et al, US 2024/0003008 A1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited art teaches the technological background of the invention. The cited art contains patents that could be used to reject the claims under 35 USC § 102 or 103. These rejections have not been made because they do not provide any additional or different teachings, and if they were applied, would have resulted in an undue multiplication of references. (See MPEP 707.07(g))
The following reference could be used to reject at least claims 1, 18, and 21 under 102: US 12577666 B2.
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 Jeffrie R Lund whose telephone number is (571)272-1437. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am-5 pm (Monday-Friday).
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.
/Jeffrie R Lund/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights