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 Fig. 2 in the reply filed on 9/8/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no serious search and examination burden and that searching for art in the elected species will also uncover the most relevant art for the unelected species, and thus a serious search and examination burden does not exist. This is not found persuasive because as previously discussed, searching for all the individual multiple and concrete structural differences among the four different species, as can be clearly seen in the drawings, entails many different fields of searches, such as searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search queries, a different field of search is shown, even though the two are classified together, to account for all the differences. For instance, as can be clearly seen in the drawings, the multiple species have separate differences, including Fig. 3 bushing having an orifice whose diameter varies from top to bottom, Fig. 4 having a metal coating at the bottom, Fig. 5 having a threaded outer surface and coupling to a body, none of which a search for Fig. 2’s bushing, a constant diameter orifice requires, contrary to the applicant’s assertion. Additionally, the applicant has not qualitatively defined what is a serious burden, and his argument that a search of the elected species will also uncover the most relevant art for the unelected species is not supported by evidence or explanation. Applicant has not argued that the species are not patentably distinct and has not admitted on the record that they are obvious variants of one another. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 2, 5, 11, 12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 9/8/26.
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, 4, 7, 8, 16-18, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Sasaki (JP 2022091561).
Regarding claim 1. Sasaki teaches in the drawings a gas distribution plate for a process chamber (plate shaped gas discharge part 53 for process container 1, fig. 1 [13-15]), comprising: a body comprising a substantially flat plate made from a first material (the flat/plate base 61 of 53 made of Al/Al alloy [27-32] fig. 1-2); a plurality of gas distribution holes extending through the body (sleeve mount holes 61b extending thru 61 fig. 3a), wherein the plurality of gas distribution holes have a diameter that varies through the body (61b is stepped, w/ larger and smaller diameter sections across its vertical length/height, fig. 2, 3a), and wherein a throat of the plurality of gas distribution holes corresponds with a location where the diameter of the gas distribution holes is smallest (the lower neck/throat part of 61b having the smallest diameter, fig. 2, 3a);
a bushing at least partially disposed in each of the plurality of gas distribution holes (sleeve 62 fitted into each 61b [29 43], fig. 2, 3b), wherein the bushing comprises a bottom plate that includes an orifice with a diameter smaller than the diameter of the throat (lower part of 62 forming a short annular thin/plate like structure having orifice 54b diameter smaller than 61b, fig. 2-3 [30]) and sidewalls extending from the bottom plate (fig. 2, 3, 54b smaller diameter than that of the wider upper sidewalls of 62 extending from said short annular plate of the lower part), and wherein the bushing is made of a second material different from the first material (62 made of steel, hastelloy vs Al of 61 [28 29]).
Regarding claim 3. Sasaki teaches the gas distribution plate of claim 1, wherein the second material is more corrosion resistant than the first material (62 is corrosion resistant, while 61 is subject to corrosion [29 34 47]).
Regarding claim 4. Sasaki teaches the gas distribution plate of claim 1, wherein the bushing is press fit into the plurality of gas distribution holes (there is substantially no structural difference regarding the product by process limitation of press fit, Fig. 2-3 show the sleeve flush resting on the support portions of 61, identical w/ applicant’s fig. 2; further, since there is no additional description of any structural changes due to press fitting, or the specific nature of the press fit/such as force etc, per applicant’s specification other than the drawings, and since both the bushing/sleeve and body are hard metal materials, a simple flush contact between the two is sufficient).
Regarding claim 7. Sasaki teaches the gas distribution plate of claim 1, wherein the orifice has a substantially constant diameter (fig. 2, 54b is straight/single diameter along the vertical/length of the orifice of single diameter [30]).
Regarding claim 8. Sasaki teaches the gas distribution plate of claim 1, wherein the bushing is disposed in an upper portion of the body (62 is inserted into the upper opening part of the hole 61b of 61, such that the top surfaces of 62 and 61 are flush, and the upper walls of 62 are inserted into at least the upper half of 61, fig. 2, [32]).
Regarding claim 16. Sasaki teaches a process chamber (airtight/main body container 1 formed of upper antenna container and lower plasma generation space [12]), comprising: a chamber body having an interior volume thereon (the hollow wall structure of 1 w/ a combined volume/space of 3, 4 inside, fig. 1, [12]); a substrate support disposed in the interior volume and configured to support a substrate (table 23 mounting wafer S at bottom and inside volume 4, fig. 1 [18]); and a gas distribution plate disposed in and partitions the interior volume (showerhead 2, including parts 50, 51 located inside the space of the overall main body container, fig. 1 [13 15]) and comprising: a body comprising a substantially flat plate made of a first material; a plurality of gas distribution holes extending through the body, wherein the plurality of gas distribution holes have a diameter that varies through the body, and wherein a throat of the plurality of gas distribution holes corresponds with a location where the diameter of the gas distribution holes is smallest; and a bushing at least partially disposed in each of the plurality of gas distribution holes, wherein the bushing comprises a bottom plate that includes an orifice with a diameter smaller than the diameter of the throat and sidewalls extending from the bottom plate, and wherein the bushing is made of a second material difference from the first material (all previous language starting from the body discussed in claim 1).
Regarding claim 17. Sasaki teaches the process chamber of claim 16, wherein at least one of: the bushing is press fit into the plurality of gas distribution holes (see claim 4); or the bushing includes a threaded outer surface and is coupled to the body via the threaded outer surface.
Regarding claim 18. Sasaki teaches the process chamber of claim 16, wherein an upper surface of the bushing is coplanar with an upper surface of the body (fig. 2, 3d, top surfaces of 62, 61 are flush, [32 43]).
Regarding claim 20. Sasaki teaches the process chamber of claim 16, wherein the process chamber is a plasma chamber (ICP process chamber [11 17]).
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) 6, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sasaki (JP 2022091561) in view of Schneider (US 6263829).
Regarding claim 6. Sasaki teaches the gas distribution plate of claim 1, wherein the first material is metal (as previously discussed in claim 1) but does not teach the second material is ceramic. However, Schneider teaches the second material is ceramic (gas orifice inserts 140 made of alumina set in a metal gas manifold of a plasma chamber and can be flexibly machined or cast to near net shape, col. 7:10-20). It would be obvious to those skilled in the art at the time of the invention to modify Sasaki so that the hole is erosion resistant, which Sasaki uses ceramic in another embodiment [56], and that can be adapted to different support structures using flexible machining.
Regarding claim 19. Sasaki teaches the process chamber of claim 16, wherein, further in view of Schneider, the bushing is made of a ceramic material (see above in claim 6).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sasaki (JP 2022091561) in view of Choi (US 20040206305).
Regarding claim 9. Sasaki teaches the gas distribution plate of claim 1, wherein the diameter of each of the plurality of gas distribution holes decreases from an upper surface of the body to the throat (61b wide at upper side and narrows to the lower side towards the neck/throat part) but does not teach it increases from the throat to a lower surface of the body. However, Choi teaches in fig. 2 the hole diameter increases from the throat 214 to a lower surface of the body 204 [38-41]. It would be obvious to those skilled in the art at invention time to modify Sasaki so that the throat is shorter and easier to machine [41].
Claim(s) 10, 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sasaki (JP 2022091561) in view of Choi (US 20040206305) and Schneider (US 6263829).
Regarding claim 10. Sasaki teaches a gas distribution plate for a process chamber, comprising: a body comprising a substantially flat plate made of metal (see claim 1); a plurality of gas distribution holes extending through the body (claim 1), wherein, in view of Choi, teaches the plurality of gas distribution holes have a diameter that decreases from an upper surface of the body to a throat of the plurality of gas distribution holes and increases from a throat to a lower surface of the body (claim 1, 9), and wherein the throat corresponds with a location where the diameter of the gas distribution holes is smallest; and a bushing disposed in each of the plurality of gas distribution holes, wherein the bushing comprises a bottom plate that includes an orifice with a diameter smaller than the diameter of the throat and sidewalls extending from the bottom plate (all the previous from, wherein the throat corresponds, see claim 1), and, further in view of Schneider, teaches wherein the bushing is made of a ceramic material (see claim 6).
Regarding claim 13. Sasaki, in view of Choi and Schneider, teaches the gas distribution plate of claim 10, wherein the sidewalls of the bushing form a cylinder (Sasaki stepped cylinder sleeve [29]).
Regarding claim 14. Sasaki, in view of Choi and Schneider, teaches the gas distribution plate of claim 10, wherein a diameter of the orifice is about 0.01 to about 0.05 inches (Sasaki [30] 0.5-1mm or 0.02-0.039 within the claimed range).
Regarding claim 15. Sasaki, in view of Choi and Schneider, teaches the gas distribution plate of claim 10, but does not teach wherein a height of the bushing is less than half of a thickness of the gas distribution plate. However, Schneider teaches that the ceramic around a gas orifice need only be 3-5x the diameter thickness, if applied to Sasaki’s 0.5-1mm orifice, the bushing is 1.5-5mm tall, under half thickness of a gas distribution plate, eg. 1.2in Choi [36]. It would be obvious to those skilled in the art at the time of the invention to modify Sasaki to reduce the size of the ceramic part and accommodate its thermal expansion mismatch w/ Al base, Schneider fig. 2a-b, 5 and related description, Sasaki [59].
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
