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 .
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 2 requires “tin (Tin)” as a material. “Tin” is not a periodic table element. Correction to “Sn” is required. Claim 2 requires “titanium dioxide (TiOx)” as a material. “titanium dioxide (TiOx)” is not the correct formula. Correction to “titanium dioxide (TiO2)” is required. Claim 2 requires “chromium oxide (CrOx)” as a material. “chromium oxide (CrOx)” is an ambiguous formula. Correction to “chromium oxide (CrxOy)” is required to account for variable oxidation states.
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 1-4, 7, 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by O'Donnell, Robert J. (US 20030181065 A1). O'Donnell teaches a metal part (“parts...metal..”; [0072]) provided in a process chamber (10; Figure 4; [0067]) into which a process gas is introduced, the metal part (“parts...metal..”; [0072]) comprising: a metal body (70; Figure 5-“ chamber walls, substrate holders, fasteners, etc.... gas supply systems, liners, lift mechanisms, load locks, door mechanisms, robotic arms, fasteners, and the like.”; [0072]); and a radiation layer (90-TiO2; Figure 5; [0078]-[0080]) provided on a surface of the metal body (70; Figure 5-“ chamber walls, substrate holders, fasteners, etc.... gas supply systems, liners, lift mechanisms, load locks, door mechanisms, robotic arms, fasteners, and the like.”; [0072]).
O'Donnell further teaches:
The metal part (“parts...metal..”; [0072]) of claim 1, wherein the radiation layer (90-TiO2; Figure 5; [0078]-[0080]) includes at least one of tin (Tin), titanium dioxide (TiOx), and chromium oxide (CrOx), as claimed by claim 2
The metal part (“parts...metal..”; [0072]) of claim 1, further comprising: a protection layer (100 - “ceramic material coating”; Figure 5; [0015]) provided on a surface of the radiation layer (90-TiO2; Figure 5; [0078]-[0080]), wherein the radiation layer (90-TiO2; Figure 5; [0078]-[0080]) is provided between the metal body (70; Figure 5-“ chamber walls, substrate holders, fasteners, etc.... gas supply systems, liners, lift mechanisms, load locks, door mechanisms, robotic arms, fasteners, and the like.”; [0072]) and the protection layer (100 - “ceramic material coating”; Figure 5; [0015]), as claimed by claim 3
The metal part (“parts...metal..”; [0072]) of claim 1, further comprising: an anodic aluminum oxide layer (80-Al2O3; Figure 5; [0078]-[0080]) between the metal body (70; Figure 5-“ chamber walls, substrate holders, fasteners, etc.... gas supply systems, liners, lift mechanisms, load locks, door mechanisms, robotic arms, fasteners, and the like.”; [0072]) and the radiation layer (90-TiO2; Figure 5; [0078]-[0080]), as claimed by claim 4
The metal-part of claim 1, wherein the metal part (“parts...metal..”; [0072]) is a diffuser (70; Figure 5-“ chamber walls, substrate holders, fasteners, etc.... gas supply systems, liners, lift mechanisms, load locks, door mechanisms, robotic arms, fasteners, and the like.”; [0072]) having a gas injection hole, as claimed by claim 7. For functionality, “gas supply systems” must have at least one “gas injection hole”.
A process chamber (10; Figure 4; [0067]), comprising: a metal part (“parts...metal..”; [0072]) including a metal body (70; Figure 6-“ chamber walls, substrate holders, fasteners, etc.... gas supply systems, liners, lift mechanisms, load locks, door mechanisms, robotic arms, fasteners, and the like.”; [0072]); and a radiation layer (100 - “ceramic material coating”; Figure 5; [0015]) provided on a surface of the metal body (70; Figure 5-“ chamber walls, substrate holders, fasteners, etc.... gas supply systems, liners, lift mechanisms, load locks, door mechanisms, robotic arms, fasteners, and the like.”; [0072]), wherein the metal part (“parts...metal..”; [0072]) is provided in communication with an inside of the process chamber (10; Figure 4; [0067]) into which a process gas is introduced, as claimed by claim 9
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated/demonstrated by O'Donnell, Robert J. (US 20030181065 A1) and Siemers; Paul A. et al. (US 5553114 A) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over as demonstrated by Siemers; Paul A. et al. (US 5553114 A). O'Donnell metal part (“parts...metal..”; [0072]) of claim 1, wherein the radiation layer (90-TiO2; Figure 5; [0078]-[0080]) has an emissivity of 0.56 to 0.88 is demonstrated/obvious over Siemers who teaches TiO2 coatings (Table 1) within the claimed range.
If the Examiner’s grounds of anticipation are not accepted, then it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for O'Donnell to use Siemers’ TiO2 coatings.
Motivation for O'Donnell to use Siemers’ TiO2 coatings is for “thermal protection” and in preventing “flaking” in harsh environments (column 1; lines 46-63).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O'Donnell, Robert J. (US 20030181065 A1) in view of Shiraishi; Jun et al. (US 20200286769 A1). O'Donnell is discussed above. O'Donnell does not teach:
The metal part (“parts...metal..”; [0072]) of claim 4, wherein the anodic aluminum oxide layer (80-Al2O3; Figure 5; [0078]-[0080]) includes at least one of a barrier layer and a porous layer having pores, as claimed by claim 5
The metal part (“parts...metal..”; [0072]) of claim 4, wherein the anodic aluminum oxide layer (80-Al2O3; Figure 5; [0078]-[0080]) includes a porous layer having pores, and the radiation layer (90-TiO2; Figure 5; [0078]-[0080]) is formed inside each of the pores, as claimed by claim 6
Shiraishi teaches a porous part (90; Figure 3B) used in plasma processing comprising aluminum oxide ([0110]) and titanium dioxide ([0110]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for O'Donnell to use Shiraishi’s porous composition as taught by Shiraishi.
Motivation for O'Donnell to use Shiraishi’s porous composition as taught by Shiraishi is for “high rigidity” as taught by Shiraishi ([0110]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ceramic coatings for pretection against aggressive environments like plasma include US 20140230694 A1; US 20110283942 A1; US 20080160858 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