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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3, 4, 6-10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 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) 1, 3, 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Appleyard (2003/0201722) in view of Hsing et al. (2017/0194129).
Regarding Claim 1, Appleyard (2003/0201722) discloses a plasma generation assembly in a plasma source (application of the three-coil configuration to a helicon plasma source, paragraph [0064]) powered by an external radio-frequency (RF) power source (RF power supply 21) (Fig. 5), comprising:
a plasma generation chamber (15) having an inlet end and an outlet end, the inlet end (gas feed 24, annotated in fig. 7 below, paragraph [0067]) being configured to receive a reactive gas and an outlet end (outlet of the chamber 15 located between chamber 15 and chamber 16) to an external reaction chamber (16) (Fig. 7, paragraphs [0027], [0066]);
PNG
media_image1.png
547
538
media_image1.png
Greyscale
And a coil or solenoid having a first section and a second section (coils 1, 2) (fig. 6), provided coaxially surrounding an upstream portion (covered by coil 1) and a downstream portion (covered by coil 2) of the plasma generation chamber, respectively, wherein the coil or solenoid is configured to receive an electric current from the RF power source (RF power supply 21), the current generating a magnetic field in the plasma generation chamber (“an additional coil or coils can be added, at a larger radius, to control the magnetic field strength in the process chamber”, paragraph [0062], fig. 4) to ionize the reactive gas (“it produces a reactive, purely chemical, environment with extremely good power efficiency”, paragraph [0068]), thereby converting the reactive gas to the plasma-state reactive species, as the reactive gas flows from the upstream portion (covered by coil 1) towards the downstream portion (covered by coil 2), and wherein the first section (Coil 1) of the coil or solenoid has a turns ratio (50 turns), that is greater than the turns ratio (43 turns) at the second section (“coils 1 and 2 with 50 turns in coil 1 and 43 turns in coil 2, each coil carrying a current of 33 Amps”, paragraphs [0059] to [0060], fig. 2, 5, 6).
As discussed above, Appleyard essentially discloses the claimed invention but does not explicitly disclose an outlet end being configured to provide one or more plasma-state reactive species through a conduit.
However, Hsing et al. (2017/0194129) discloses the aperture as outlet and an aperture disc at of the plasma generation chamber through a conduit (inside the hole) (annotated in Fig. 1 below).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided a conduit to allow the plasma state reactive species to go through in Appleyard in order to prevent the leakage of gas and plasma from chamber to outside as taught by Hsing.
PNG
media_image2.png
420
434
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3, as discussed above, Appleyard essentially discloses the claimed invention but does not explicitly disclose the plasma generation assembly of Claim 1, further comprising an aperture disc at the outlet end of the plasma generation chamber, wherein the conduit is provided as an aperture in the aperture disc.
However, Hsing et al. (2017/0194129) discloses an aperture disc at the outlet end of the plasma generation chamber, wherein the conduit is provided as an aperture in the aperture disc (Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided an aperture disc at the outlet of the plasma generation chamber in order to prevent the leakage of gas and plasma from the chamber to outside as taught by Hsing.
Regarding Claim 4, as discussed above, Appleyard essentially discloses the claimed invention but does not explicitly disclose the plasma generation assembly of Claim 1, wherein the aperture of the aperture disc has a selected one of a plurality of desirable diameters.
However, it has been held that changing the size or proportion merely involves routine skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955) (Claims directed to a lumber package “of appreciable size and weight requiring handling by a lift truck” were held unpatentable over prior art lumber packages which could be lifted by hand because limitations relating to the size of the package were not sufficient to patentably distinguish over the prior art.); In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976) (“mere scaling up of a prior art process capable of being scaled up, if such were the case, would not establish patentability in a claim to an old process so scaled.” 531 F.2d at 1053, 189 USPQ at 148.).
it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided any desired size of the aperture according to a desired diameter in Appleyard in order to fit with the size of the plasma chamber and allow a desired plasma flow into the chamber.
Claim(s) 6, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Appleyard (2003/0201722) in view of Hsing et al. (2017/0194129) further in view of Wallace-Smith (2024/0290507).
Regarding Claim 6, as discussed above, Appleyard in view of Hsing essentially discloses the claimed invention but does not explicitly disclose the plasma generation assembly of Claim 1, wherein the plasma generation chamber comprises a plurality of parts that are attached and sealed using a brazing technique, to ensure vacuum-sealing of the plasma generation chamber during operation.
However, Wallace-Smith (2024/0290507) discloses the plasma generation chamber comprising a plurality of parts that are attached and sealed using a brazing technique to ensure vacuum sealing of the plasma generation chamber during operation (stub tube 8 which may be brazed or otherwise attached so as to achieve a leak free or ultra-high vacuum standard sea, paragraph [0073]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided a brazed structure of the tube in Appleyard/Hsing in order to achieve a leak free or ultra-high vacuum standard seal as taught by Wallace-Smith.
Claim(s) 7, 8, 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Appleyard (2003/0201722) in view of Hsing et al. (2017/0194129) further in view of Fukuma (2024/0118638).
Regarding Claim 7, Appleyard in view of Hsing essentially discloses the claimed invention but does not disclose the plasma generation assembly of Claim 1, wherein the plasma generation chamber comprises a quartz tube.
However, Fukuma (2024/0118638) discloses that the plasma generator is constituted by the quartz tube 223 and the high-frequency coil 222 installed along the outer peripheral surface of the quartz tube 223 (paragraph [0207]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have constituted the plasma chamber or tube in quartz material in Appleyward in view of Hsing in order to insulate heat or electricity from the plasma to outside as taught by Fukuma.
Regarding Claim 8, Appleyard essentially discloses the claimed invention but does not explicitly disclose plasma generation assembly of Claim 7, further comprising a mounting flange that connects the external reaction chamber to the plasma generation chamber (fig. 2.)
However, Hsing teaches a mounting flange (130) that connects the external reaction chamber to plasma generation chamber (Fig. 2) to create an airtight seal and secure the assembly (“The top flange 121 and the bottom flange 130 may be made of stainless steel, aluminum, nickel-plated brass or other suitable materials”, paragraph [0028] of Hsing.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided mounting flange of Hsing in Appleyard to create an airtight seal and secure the assembly as taught by Hsing.
Regarding Claim 9, Appleyard in view of Hsing further in view of Fukuma discloses the plasma generation assembly of Claim 8, wherein the mounting flange is formed out of stainless steel (“The top flange 121 and the bottom flange 130 may be made of stainless steel, aluminum, nickel-plated brass or other suitable materials”, paragraph [0028] of Hsing).
As discussed above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided mounting flange made of stainless steel of Hsing in Appleyard to provide durability of steel in order to create an airtight seal and secure the assembly as taught by Hsing.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Appleyard (2003/0201722) in view of Hsing et al. (2017/0194129) further in view of Fukuma (2024/0118638), further in view of Weimer et al. (2023/0360922).
Regarding Claim 10, Appleyard in view of Hsing further in view of Fukuma essentially discloses the claimed invention but does not explicitly disclose the plasma generation assembly of Claim 8, further comprising bellows that attach the mounting flange (130. See Figure 2 of Hsing) to the plasma generation chamber.
However, Weimer et al. (2023/0360922) discloses a plasma chamber comprising bellows (650) sealed to the conduit and attached to the flange (628) of the chamber wall (paragraphs [0181] to [0183], fig. 6A-C).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided the bellows sealed to the conduit and attached to the flange in Appleyard in order to help secure the flange and prevent leakage of the chamber as taught by Weimer.
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Moradian et al. (2025/0210315) discloses that the coil 130 has a short transition region near the leads, and the remainder of the coil turns are parallel to the bottom surface 180. In one or more embodiments, the coil 130 is helical. In one or more embodiments, the coil 130 has 2-5 turns (paragraph [0037]).
Ramasamy (2024/0091877) discloses that the number of turns of the primary and secondary windings and/or the ratio of turns of the windings are selected to provide a sufficient voltage to electrodes 24, 26 to create and sustain an arc that will ignite powder 14 passing through chamber 23 (paragraph [0053]).
Criminale et al. (2023/0413446) discloses that the inductively coupled plasma apparatus 142 is disposed above the lid 133 and is configured to inductively couple RF power into the process chamber 107 to generate a plasma within the process chamber 107. The inductively coupled plasma apparatus 142 includes first and second coils 116, 118, disposed above the lid 133. The relative position, ratio of diameters of each coil 116, 118, and/or the number of turns in each coil 116, 118 can each be adjusted as desired to control the profile or density of the plasma being formed. Each of the first and second coils 116, 118 is coupled to an RF power supply 138 through a matching network 114 via an RF feed structure 136 (paragraph [0063]).
Yang et al. (2023/0411120) discloses that the preset current ratio in the inner and outer RF coils in the first RF mechanism may refer to a ratio of the current value I1 of the inner radio frequency coil to a sum I2 of the current value of the inner RF coil and the outer RF coil. The setting condition of the ratio, for example, may include determining whether the ratio is within a range of 0.5±0.1 (paragraph [0050]).
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Wilson Lee whose telephone number is (571) 272-1824. Proposed amendment and interview agenda can be submitted to Examiner’s direct fax at (571) 273-1824.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, examiner’s supervisor, Alexander Taningco can be reached at (571) 272-8048. Papers related to the application may be submitted by facsimile transmission. Any transmission not to be considered an official response must be clearly marked "DRAFT". The official fax number is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. For more information about the Patent Center, see https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/WILSON LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2844