DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-3 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimomura (2014/0291318) in view of Hirose (2019/0066985).
Shimomura teaches a system comprising:
- a chamber body with a processing volume, see Fig. 1, volume “A”,
- a substrate pedestal in the volume, see supporting table 13 (also related text [0021-27], wherein the stage has coolant channels, see 35,
- a coolant medium circulator, see coolant pump, described per [0025],
- a coolant medium circulation controller – see control unit 14 that includes a temperature control unit 61 that controls the flow rate of the coolant based on the measurement of the temperature measurement unit 26 [0048].
The system of Shimomura further includes a microwave apparatus as a heater, see 11 per Fig. 1, [0021], but is silent on any correlation of the microwave power to the coolant flow rate control. Hirose teaches a system with a cooling supply and a heater, see Fig. 1 and particularly [0069-71]. The teachings include controlling, by a controller, the flow rate of coolant (by adjusting a screw) based on the input power supplied to the heater 27. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the invention to control the flow rate of the rate at which cooling medium passes through the channels based on the input power to the heater in the system of Shimomura as Hirose teaches that such control is effective at controlling the system temperature (balancing between heating and cooling effects). The combination includes the control of the heater power – in the case of Hirose the power to the heater is not specifically a microwave heater, but the principal is analogous as in either case, the power provided to the heater affects selection of coolant flow rate.
Regarding claim 2, the claims are apparatus claims and the limitations are interpreted based on structure and not the use, the case law previously presented and not repeated. In this case, the system includes microwave units 40 which are capable of performing an annealing operation, therefore the limitations are met.
Regarding claim 3, again, an intended use, but the frequency is 2.45 GHz [0034].
Regarding claim 9, the claims do not actively require a substrate, so that is intended use, in any case Shimomura teaches a wafer (W in Fig. 1) and also has a gas supply unit, 12. The use of a gas for any purpose, such as cooling, is intended use.
Claims 5 -8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimomura and Hirose in view of Mahadewaraswamy (2012/0048467).
The teachings of Shimomura are described above, and as noted teach a controller to control the rate of the coolant medium but are silent on how the determination is made. Mahadewaraswamy, however, teaches that in cooling an element using a coolant flow controlled by a controller, it is useful to use a look up table in order to determine variables of the cooling cycle [0051]. It would have been obvious at the effective date of the invention to apply the look up table of Mahadewaraswamy in combination with the controller of Shimomura as Shimomura teaches to control the flow rate based on the temperature reading but makes no further indication of how the control is carried out and Mahadewaraswamy teaches that look up tables are useful for holding information in regard to a cooling cycle which includes a coolant flow.
Regarding claims 6 and 7, the teachings of Mahadewaraswamy are not limited on what data is included in the table, but in combination with Shimomura, it would have been further obvious to apply any information such as what would be related to any elements, i.e. such as microwave power, that are related to generation of heat so as to effective direct control of the cooling medium. While the teachings do not expressly teach the same elements in a look up table, such elements are generally understood as determined process variables. Any process variable, particularly one that would impact the heat and need for cooling, would be reasonable applied within the look up table, such as microwave power (duration) and ambient gas (temperature) such as those claimed.
Regarding claim 8, the use of any microwave power is intended use of the apparatus and wherein the teachings are silent the selection of 100 w to 20 kw is obvious. In regard to the gas and cooling medium, the selections are obvious, but in any case, the prior art teaches nitrogen gas [0023] and teaches a fluorine organic liquid – wherein “freon” is claimed, and is held under 112 above, the limitation is met.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to instant claims have been considered, the arguments in view of the amendments are persuasive, however, the further teachings of Hirose are applied, as per above. The teachings of Hirose are included to teach the control of coolant medium circulation flow rate based on an input heater power.
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 JOSEPH A MILLER, JR whose telephone number is (571)270-5825. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael Cleveland can be reached at 571-272-1418. The fax phone number for the organization where this application 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/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.
/JOSEPH A MILLER, JR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712
