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 with traverse of Group I (claims 1-12) in the reply filed on 2/25/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that undue diverse searching should not be required. This is not found persuasive because the search and examination of all claims are not coextensive.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 13-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Group II (Method Claims), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 2/25/26.
Claim Interpretation
Claims 1 and 12 do not require the vaporization amount adjusting plate being in direct contact with the surface of the solid raw material. It is suggested to amend the claim to positively indicate that wherein the vaporization amount adjusting plate having a top surface and a bottom surface and the bottom surface is in direct contact with the surface of the solid raw material and the carrier gas is flowing over the top surface of the vaporization amount adjusting plate.
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.
Claims 1 (and its dependent claims 2-11) and claim 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), 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.
It is not clear how “the carrier gas is vaporized from the solid raw material”. The carrier gas is not vaporized; rather the solid material is vaporized and carried by the carrier gas. It is suggested to amend the claim to indicate that “the carrier gas carrying a preterminal materials vaporized from the solid raw material and carries the predetermined …”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
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.
Claim(s) 1-8 and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki (KR 20080102184 cited on 1449 also included in 892 for translation) in view of Nakagawa (KR 20200090180 cited on 1449 also included in 892 for translation) and Huang (US 20190284695).
Regarding claims 1 and 12: Suzuki discloses a semiconductor manufacturing system (Fig. 1, abstract) comprising a vaporization device 50 (50 in Fig. 1 and 300 in Fig. 3) and a film forming apparatus 30; wherein the vaporization device 300 (Fig. 3) including an exhaust passage 322 configured to exhaust a carrier gas carrying evaporated material from the solid material 350.
Suzuki does not disclose a cover plate including distribution holes.
Nakagawa discloses a vaporization device (Fig. 1, abstract) including a lid unit (23) (vaporization amount adjusting plate or showerhead) that covers the surface of a solid raw material 25 and having openings 41 for distribution of the evaporated material.
Nakagawa discloses “The stopper unit 23 is provided with one or more upper vents 41 through which the vapor of the solid 25 passes. The vapor of the solids 25 may be accompanied by carrier gas. The upper vent portion 41 may be any shape through which gas can pass, such as a slit shape or a cylindrical hole shape. As shown in FIG. 3, there may be an arrangement of showerheads in which a plurality of cylindrical holes are arranged at predetermined intervals.”
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 Suzuki to include the cover 23 as taught by Nakagawa in order to distribute the vaporized material with a particular distribution pattern as desired. As taught by Nakagawa, the shape and distribution of holes are not limited and can have any desired distribution patterns.
Huang further discloses a showerhead including a plurality of holes wherein the distribution of holes varies along radial direction (abstract, Figs. 2, 5, 6, [0024-0026, 0028, 0031-0032]).
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 Suzuki in view of Nakagawa to include the holes distribution patterns as taught by Huang in order to distribute the vaporized material with a particular distribution pattern as desired. As taught by Nakagawa and Huang, the shape and distribution of holes are not limited and can have any desired distribution patterns.
Further regarding claims 2-8: As taught by Nakagawa and Huang, the shape and distribution of holes are not limited and can have any desired distribution patterns. As taught by Suzuki, the body is tubular shape 312 with ring-shaped trays 340 for solid raw materials 350 (Fig. 3) and surrounding the outlet (exhaust path) 322.
Further regarding claim 11: Suzuki further disclose precursor heater: “ In addition, the vessel 310 is coupled to a heater (not shown) to raise the evaporation temperature of the membrane precursor evaporation system 300 and the temperature to perform one or more of monitoring, adjusting, or controlling the evaporation temperature. It is configured to be coupled to a control system (not shown). When the evaporation temperature is raised to an appropriate value as described above, the film precursor evaporates (or sublimes) to form film precursor vapor, which is then passed through the vapor transport system to the thin film deposition system. The vessel 310 is also sealedly coupled to a carrier gas supply system (not shown), and the vessel 310 is configured to receive a carrier gas that transports membrane precursor vapor.”
Claim(s) 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki (KR 20080102184 cited on 1449 also included in 892 for translation) in view of Nakagawa (KR 20200090180 cited on 1449 also included in 892 for translation) and Huang (US 20190284695) as applied to claims 1 above, and further in view of Chaubey (US 9034105).
Suzuki in view of Nakagawa and Huang as discussed above does not disclose the plate being in direct contact with the solid precursor and being made of stainless steal
Claim 10: Chaubey discloses plates 660 configured to restrain solid precursor particles on disks (Fig. 6D, [42]). Several exemplary embodiments are shown in Fig 6A-6C. The restraining plate can be a mesh (Fig. 6A) or a perforated disk wit holes 625(Fig. 6B), or formed by fiber (Fig. 6C) ([39-41]).
Regarding claim 9: Chaubey discloses the martial of construction is not limited and can be stainless steel ([41]).
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 Suzuki in view of Nakagawa and Huang to place the cover plate directly on the surface of the solid precursor in order to restrain the solid precursor particles.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Onoe (US 6270839) discloses an evaporation device (Fig. 1) including a pair of mesh metal wires 3 for supporting the solid raw material therebetween ([7]). The mesh is made of stainless-steel wires 3 ([8]).
Myung (US 20190221403) discloses a showerhead including a plurality of holes wherein the distribution of holes varies along radial direction (abstract, Figs. 2A, 3-5A, 6A, 6B, [0040-0045, 0050-0053]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Parviz Hassanzadeh whose telephone number is (571)272-1435. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Alexa Neckel can be reached at 571-272-1446. 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.
/PARVIZ HASSANZADEH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights