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 of species Fig. 3d in the reply filed on 5/11/26 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claim 9 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Upon further inspection, it was found that claims 15, 16, 19, 20 are directed to non-elected species, such as fig. 3a-c and are also withdrawn. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/11/26.
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 18 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 18 recites the limitation of a slit valve in the sidewall of the chamber body. However, the claim previously introduced sidewalls, and it is uncertain which specific sidewall among the multiple sidewalls is being referred to having a slit valve. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 2-8, 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 2 recites that there are two annular zones. However, claim 1 already stated that there are at least two annular zones, hence even if there are more than two annular zones, there will always be two annular zones to fulfill the minimum requirement of claim 1. Thus, claim 2 fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 1, since claim 2 simply repeats what already must exist in claim 1. Similarly, claim 5 states that the two annular zones, inner and outer, have two sector zones. However, claim 1 already stated that each of the at least two annular zones is separated into at least two sector zones. Hence, all the at least two annular zones, including the inner and outer cited in claim 3, must have two sector zones at the minimum. Thus claim 5 fails to further limit the subject matter of at least claim 3 since claim 5 is restating what already must exist in claim 3. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Dependent claims 3-8, 10-14 are also rejected by dependency to rejected claims 2, 5.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-8, 10-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Lo (US 20170107619).
Regarding claim 1. Lo teaches in the drawings a vapor deposition processing chamber temperature control apparatus (fig. 1, shielding plate 150 part of CVD chamber/apparatus 100 and serving as heat reflector [12-14]) comprising: a base plate (the main/bulk structure of 150 is a circular plate, fig. 1-3, 5-6) having a top surface (fig. 1, 151 top face of 150) with an opening in a center thereof (fig. 1-3, 5-6 opening 154 in center of 150/151) and an outer peripheral edge (circumference/outer edge of 150/151 fig. 1-3 5-6); and a plurality of reflectors (fig. 6 [34 35] reflection sections 153) separated into at least two annular zones (six ring 153 fig. 6), each of the at least two annular zones separated into at least two sector zones (each of 153 has six further sections/divisions, fig. 6 and four of the 153 has at least regions 151a, b w/ diff polishing [34 35]), wherein the plurality of reflectors are configured to decrease a specific side-to-side temperature non-uniformity profile of a heated substrate support positioned above the base plate in the vapor deposition processing chamber (the heat reflection from the shielding plate/reflector 150, which includes said reflectors performing the heat reflection [34 35], increases temp dist or side-side profile evenness/reduce non-uniformity of the holder 130/wafer P that are above 150/151 in the 100, fig. 1, [14, 44], having the same exact configuration as applicant fig. 1).
Regarding claim 2. Lo teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein there are two annular zones (at least two since there are six ring zones 153 fig. 6).
Regarding claim 3. Lo teaches the apparatus of claim 2, wherein the two annular zones comprise an inner annular zone and an outer annular zone (fig. 6, there are multiple inner and outer ring zones 153), the inner annular zone spaced a distance from the outer annular zone (eg. Innermost ring 153 is spaced at least 4-ring distances from the outermost 153) to form a ring between the inner annular zone and the outer annular zone (there are various intervening rings, eg individual four 153 rings, one big ring made of a four between the innermost and outermost rings, other variations exist, fig. 6) where the base plate is exposed (all the 153 comprise/form 150 [34], hence those intervening ring(s) of at least one 153 is/are also 150 thus exposing 150 in those intervening ring areas).
Regarding claim 5. Lo teaches the apparatus of claim 3, wherein the wherein each of the inner annular zone and the outer annular zone have two sector zones (fig. 6, all the 153 rings have six divisions/sectors in the circumferential direction).
Regarding claim 6. Lo teaches the apparatus of claim 5, wherein a first sector zone of the inner annular zone has a first inner emissivity, and a second sector zone of the inner annular zone has a second inner emissivity (if we use the outermost 153 and 3rd or 4th 153 from the outermost as inner annular zone; the 3rd, 4th 153 each have at least 1 arcuate section w/ 151a and another w/ 151b, fig. 6, each 151a and b have different reflectance [16], and since reflectance is inverse of emissivity, different emissivity).
Regarding claim 7. Lo teaches the apparatus of claim 6, wherein the first inner emissivity and the second inner emissivity are different (see claim 6).
Regarding claim 8. Lo teaches the apparatus of claim 5, wherein a first sector of the outer annular zone has a first outer emissivity, and a second sector zone of the outer annular zone has a second outer emissivity (fig. 6 the outermost 153 has arcuate sections w/ 151a and b, similar to claims 6-7).
Regarding claim 10. Lo teaches the apparatus of claim 5, wherein each of the sector zones of the inner annular zone have substantially the same shape (fig. 6, each 153 has same shaped arcuate zones within the same respective 153).
Regarding claim 11. Lo teaches the apparatus of claim 5, wherein each of the sector zones of the outer annular zone have substantially the same shape (see claim 10).
Regarding claim 12. Lo teaches the apparatus of claim 5, wherein a first sector zone of the inner annular zone is aligned with a first sector zone of the outer annular zone (fig. 6, all the individual arcuate sections of each 153 are aligned with respective arcuate sections of all the other 153 in the radial direction).
Regarding claim 13. Lo teaches the apparatus of claim 12, wherein a second sector zone of the inner annular zone is aligned with the second sector zone of the outer annular zone (see claim 12).
Regarding claim 14. Lo teaches the apparatus of claim 13, wherein the first sector zone of the inner annular zone and the first sector zone of the outer annular zone have substantially the same emissivity (fig. 6, there are radially aligned arcuate sections between the outermost 153 and at least one inner 153 that have reflectance/emissivity of 151a material, eg ones in the 12o clock radial position).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Tong (US 20220093373).
Regarding claim 18. Tong teaches in the drawings a vapor deposition processing chamber (vapor processing/dep/cvd chamber 100-300, 500 fig. 1-5 [26-34]) comprising: a chamber body (fig. 3, 300 forms a hollow vacuum chamber structure [35]) having a bottom and sidewalls defining an interior volume (fig. 3, rectangular sides and bottom w/ space inside); a slit valve in the sidewall of the chamber body ([37] fig. 3); a substrate support (315 [36-39]) comprising a support body and a support shaft (320 and 325 [36-39]), the support body having a support surface (fig. 3, 320 w/ top surface holding wafer 322), the support shaft extending from a bottom of the support body (fig. 3, 325 extends from bottom of 320), the support body comprising a heating element ([23, 36] eg heater 232 in the support body/plate 228 [29]); and a temperature control apparatus (heat/radiation shield 330 to control temp uniformity [39]) below the support body of the substrate support (fig. 3, 330 below 320), the temperature control apparatus comprising, a base plate (330 is a base/bottom plate [39]) having a top surface (top of 330 fig. 3) with an opening in a center thereof (cent opening w/ 315 thru fig. 3) and an outer peripheral edge (sides of 330 fig. 3), the support shaft extending through the opening (315 thru center hole of 330 fig. 3), and a plurality of reflectors (emissivity zones 335a, b [39] reflect heat) separated into an inner annular zone ([39] annular zones 335ab include inner 335a) with a first inner sector zone and a second inner sector zone (left and right parts/sectors of 335a fig. 3), an outer annular zone (outer annular zone 335b fig. 3 [39]) with a first outer sector zone and a second outer sector zone (left, right parts/sectors of 335b fig. 3), wherein the plurality of reflectors are configured to decrease a specific side-to-side temperature non-uniformity profile of the substrate support ([37-39] improves temp uniformity across the wafer/wafer support 322/320).
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.
Claim(s) 4, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lo (US 20170107619) in view of Ramanathan (US 20160215393).
Regarding claim 4. Lo teaches the apparatus of claim 3, but does not teach wherein the ring between the inner annular zone and the outer annular zone has three lift pin openings extending through the base plate. However, Ramanathan teaches in fig. 3a the ring between the inner annular zone and the outer annular zone (ring area between inner/outer annular zones 304 302) has three lift pin openings (202 [27]) extending through the base plate (202 extends thru the base/susceptor 106 fig. 3a). It would be obvious to those skilled in the art at the time of invention to modify Lo to raise/lower the substrate [27].
Regarding claim 17. Lo teaches a vapor deposition processing chamber temperature control apparatus comprising: a base plate having a top surface with an opening in a center thereof and an outer peripheral edge (see claim 1); and a plurality of reflectors separated into an inner annular zone and an outer annular zone (see claim 3), each of the inner annular zone and outer annular zone separated into two sector zones (see claim 1, 5), the inner annular zone spaced a distance from the outer annular zone to form a ring between the inner annular zone and the outer annular zone where the base plate is exposed (see claim 3), but does not teach the ring having three openings extending through the base plate, However, Ramanathan teaches in fig. 3a the ring between the inner annular zone and the outer annular zone (ring area between inner/outer annular zones 304 302) has three lift pin openings (202 [27]) extending through the base plate (202 extends thru the base/susceptor 106 fig. 3a). It would be obvious to those skilled in the art at the time of invention to modify Lo to raise/lower the substrate [27]. Lo further teaches wherein the plurality of reflectors are configured to decrease a specific side-to-side temperature non-uniformity profile of a heated substrate support positioned above the base plate in the vapor deposition processing chamber (see claim 1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YUECHUAN YU whose telephone number is (571)272-7190. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at 571-272-5166. 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.
/YUECHUAN YU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Prosecution Insights