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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on October 17, 2023 and IDS filed on April 19, 2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDSs are considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 9, 11, 16 and 19 are objected to because of the following informality:
In claim 9, line 2, “stored the temperature measurements” should read --store the temperature measurements--.
In claim 11, line 5, “cotemporaneous with the measuring the first temperature” should read --contemporaneously with the measuring the first temperature--.
In claim 11, line 11, “cotemporaneous with the measuring the third temperature” should read --contemporaneously with the measuring the third temperature--.
In claim 16, line 4, “cotemporaneous with the measuring the fifth temperature” should read --contemporaneously with the measuring the fifth temperature--.
In claim 16, line 9, “cotemporaneous with the measuring the fifth temperature” should read --contemporaneously with the measuring the fifth temperature--.
In claim 19, line 5, “cotemporaneous with the measuring the ninth temperature” should read --contemporaneously with the measuring the ninth temperature--.
In claim 19, line 10, “cotemporaneous with the measuring the eleventh temperature” should read --contemporaneously with the measuring the eleventh temperature--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 4 and 18 are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites the feature “the fourth site is proximal a bottom surface of the substrate support” in line 3. It is unclear what the above feature specifically refers to, thus this renders the claim indefinite.
For example, according to Figs. 1-2 and the paragraph [0028] of the Applicant’s original disclosure, the first multi-wavelength pyrometer 155 is configured to measure the second temperature at the second site 255-S proximal the top surface 171 of the substrate support 106, and the second multi-wavelength pyrometer 153 is configured to measure the fourth temperature at the fourth site 253-S proximal the top surface 171 of the substrate support 106, not proximal the bottom surface 172 of the substrate support 106. For the examination purpose, the above feature is interpreted to as --the fourth site is proximal the top surface of the substrate support--.
Claim 18 recites the feature “the fourth site is proximal a bottom surface of the substrate support” in line 3. Regarding claim 18, the discussion with respect to claim 4 above similarly applies.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tsai et al. US 2016/0020086.
Regarding claim 1, Tsai teaches a system for processing substrates (e.g., 100, Fig. 1, [11]-[20]), comprising:
a process chamber (e.g., process chamber 110 including 102, 104, 106, 108 and the like, Fig. 1, [11]) comprising a processing volume (e.g., processing volume in 110, Fig. 1);
a first window (e.g., 102, Fig. 1, [11]) at a first perimeter of the processing volume;
a substrate support (e.g., 114, Fig. 1, [11]) within the processing volume; and
a first multi-wavelength pyrometer (e.g., pyrometers 150 that are disposed close to 102 and measure temperatures of 102 and 114, Fig. 1, [11]) configured to measure:
a first temperature at a first site (e.g., first site proximal 102, Fig. 1, [11]) proximal the first window; and
a second temperature at a second site (e.g., second site proximal 114, Fig. 1, [11]) proximal the substrate support.
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 of this title, 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 6 is rejected are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. US 2016/0020086 in view of Cong et al. US 2022/0082445.
Regarding claim 6, Tsai teaches the system of claim 1, wherein: the first window comprises quartz (e.g., [11]).
Tsai does not explicitly teach the substrate support comprises silicon.
Cong teaches the substrate support comprises silicon (e.g., [27]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Tsai to include the substrate support comprises silicon as suggested by Cong for the purpose of enhancing the thermal conductivity of the substrate support, thereby heating the substate thereon for example (e.g., Cong, [27]).
Claim 7 is rejected are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. US 2016/0020086.
Regarding claim 7, Tsai teaches the system of claim 1 as discussed above.
Tsai does not explicitly teach wherein the first multi-wavelength pyrometer is configured to measure temperatures at wavelength ranges of: about 2,650 nm to about 2,750 nm; about 3,300 nm to about 3,500 nm; and about 4,800 nm to about 5,200 nm.
Tsai, however, recognizes that the pyrometers 150 include spectral pyrometers.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize and control the system of Tsai to include wherein the first multi-wavelength pyrometer is configured to measure temperatures at wavelength ranges of: about 2,650 nm to about 2,750 nm; about 3,300 nm to about 3,500 nm; and about 4,800 nm to about 5,200 nm because it has been held that where the criticality of the claimed range is not shown and the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05.
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. US 2016/0020086 in view of Leow et al. US 2020/0080894.
Regarding claim 8, Tsai teaches the system of claim 1 as discussed above.
Tsai does not explicitly teach the system further comprising a controller configured to: receive temperature measurements from the first multi-wavelength pyrometer; assess an operational state of the process chamber based on the temperature measurements.
Leow teaches a controller configured to: receive temperature measurements from the first multi-wavelength pyrometer; assess an operational state of the process chamber based on the temperature measurements (e.g., [22]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Tsai to include a controller configured to: receive temperature measurements from the first multi-wavelength pyrometer; assess an operational state of the process chamber based on the temperature measurements as suggested by Leow for the purpose of controlling the temperatures in the system, thereby enhancing the performance of the system for example (e.g., Leow, [22]).
Regarding claim 9, Tsai in view of Leow teaches the system of claim 8, wherein the controller is further configured to: stored the temperature measurements; compare the stored temperature measurements; and assess an operational state of the process chamber based on the comparison of temperature measurements (e.g., Leow, [22]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 3, 5 and 10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 11-17 and 19 would be allowable if amended to overcome the claims objection above.
Claim 20 would be allowable if amended to overcome the claims objection above.
Conclusion
The art made of record and not applied to the rejection is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. It is cited primarily to show inventions relevant to the examination of the instant invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bo Bin Jang whose telephone number is (571) 270-0271. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM EST.
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, Eva Montalvo can be reached at (571) 270-3829. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. 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.
/BO B JANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818 December 16, 2025