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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on February 1, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on April 10, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment, filed on April 10, 2026, has been received and made of record. Claims 1, 4-6, 8-12, & 14-17 are pending. Claim 3 is canceled. Claims 1, 8, 14, & 17 have been amended. Applicant’s amendments to the Claims have overcome each and every 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) rejections previously set forth in the Final Office Action mailed January 13, 2026, hereinafter referred to as the Final Office Action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pp. 7-10 of Applicant’s remarks, filed April 10, 2026, have been entered, fully considered and are persuasive. In light of the amendments, the rejection(s) have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection(s) have been made, and applicant’s arguments are rendered moot.
Claim Objections
Claims 6, 8, 12, & 14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Applicant is advised that should claim 6 be found allowable, claim 8 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. Similarly, Applicant is advised that should claim 12 be found allowable, claim 14 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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 1, 4-6, 8-12, & 14-17 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitations "the measured first current and second current…" in ll. 13-14, where “second current…” was previously disclosed in claim 1 line 8. The repeated recitation of “second current…”, introduces indefiniteness for the limitations in the claim. For examination purposes, examiner interprets this limitation to read as “the measured first current and the measured second current…”. Claims 4-6, 8-12, & 14-16 are rejected by virtue of dependence to claim 1, which do not rectify the defect.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "on the basis of the measured current flowing…" in ll. 3-4, without previous disclosure, resulting in a lack of antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, examiner interprets this limitation to read as “on a basis of the measured current flowing…”. Claim 5 is rejected by virtue of dependence to claim 4, which does not rectify the defect.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "on the basis of the measured current flowing…" in line 20, without previous disclosure, resulting in a lack of antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, examiner interprets this limitation to read as “on a basis of the measured current flowing…”.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 6, 8-9, 12, & 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto et al. (US 2005/0009347 A1, Pub. Date Jan. 13, 2005, hereinafter, Matsumoto), in view of De Chambirier (US 2021/0225614 A1, Pub. Date Jul. 22, 2021, hereinafter, De Chambirier), in view of Martinez et al. (US 2024/0055228 A1, Pub. Date Feb. 15, 2024, hereinafter, Martinez), and further in view of Dible et al. (US 5824606, Pat. Date Oct. 20, 1998, hereinafter, Dible).
Regarding independent claim 1, Matsumoto teaches:
A plasma measurement method for measuring a plasma state using a probe device that is provided in a plasma processing apparatus (Fig. 1; [Abstract], [0001], [0076], [0081], [0085]-[0091], [0124], & [0147]: measuring electron density (plasma state), antenna probe 52a (probe device)),
PNG
media_image1.png
660
865
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Matsumoto, in combination with De Chambirier, are silent in regard to:
and a measurement circuit including a signal transmitter that outputs an AC voltage, the method comprising:
step (A) of measuring a first current including a magnitude and phase of current in the measurement circuit when the AC voltage is output from the signal transmitter to the probe device, in a state where no plasma is generated in the plasma processing apparatus;
step (B) of measuring a second current including a magnitude and phase of current in the measurement circuit when the AC voltage is output from the signal transmitter to the probe device, in a state where plasma is generated in the plasma processing apparatus; and
wherein the step (C) includes measuring the current flowing through the plasma by subtracting the magnitude of the first current and the phase shift from the magnitude of the second current.
However, Matsumoto, in combination with Martinez, further teach:
and a measurement circuit including a signal transmitter that outputs an AC voltage, the method comprising (Matsumoto: [Abstract], [0076] & [0085]-[0091]: measuring electron density (plasma state), antenna probe 52a (probe device), measurement unit 54 containing a vector network analyzer 68 that outputs an AC electromagnetic signal/incident wave, interpreted as the AC voltage; Martinez: [0066] reinforces a measurement circuit with VI probes to capture RF voltage and current):
step (B) of measuring a second current including a magnitude and phase of current in the measurement circuit when the AC voltage is output from the signal transmitter to the probe device, in a state where plasma is generated in the plasma processing apparatus (Matsumoto: Figs. 5 & 20; [0085]-[0092]: teaches obtaining a second frequency characteristic of the complex reflection coefficient in a plasma “ON” state; Martinez: Fig. 8; [0066] & [0068]: reinforces by teaching that measuring active RF current (IRF) and voltage in the ON state is the standard methodology to characterize the active plasma sheath); and
PNG
media_image2.png
652
794
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 plasma state measurement method of Matsumoto by incorporating the radio frequency current (IRF) and voltage (VRF) sensing circuitry (VI probes) as taught by Martinez, according to known methods. A POSITA would have been motivated to substitute or supplement Matsumoto’s network analyzer with the VI probe circuitry of Martinez in order to obtain a direct and precise measurement of the current flowing through the measurement circuit and the plasma. This constitutes providing a known hardware implementation (VI sensors) to achieve Matsumoto’s known diagnostic goal (measuring complex electrical states). The predictable result (KSR) of this combination would be a more responsive plasma diagnostic system with real-time calculation(s) and control of the plasma dynamics taught by Matsumoto.
However, Matsumoto, in combination with De Chambirier, and Martinez, further teach:
step (A) of measuring a first current including a magnitude and phase of current in the measurement circuit when the AC voltage is output from the signal transmitter to the probe device, in a state where no plasma is generated in the plasma processing apparatus (Matsumoto: Figs. 4, 20, & 21; [0004]-[0007], [0085]-[0091] & [0094]-[0095]: teaches obtaining a first frequency characteristic of the complex reflection coefficient (contains magnitude and phase data) in a plasma OFF” state, where a “complex reflection coefficient” (Γ = Γr + jΓi) is defined by the magnitude and phase of the reflected wave relative to the incident wave, measuring this is directly equivalent to measuring the magnitude and phase of the current/voltage in the circuit, as the reflection coefficient is derived from these measurements; De Chambirier: [0074], [0111] & [Claim 20]: teaches baseline comparison; Martinez: [0045], [0066], & [0068]: uses current/voltage sensors/probes to capture the magnitude/phase of the RF current (IRF) during measurement steps);
PNG
media_image3.png
625
756
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
869
530
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
810
605
media_image5.png
Greyscale
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 plasma state measurement method of Matsumoto by incorporating the comparative parameter tracking of De Chambirier and the radio frequency sensing circuitry taught by Martinez, according to known methods. A POSITA would have been motivated to combine Matsumoto’s ON/OFF phase shift logic with De Chambirier’s before/after comparison of voltage, current, and phase to accurately isolate the electrical impact of the plasma. Further, to execute the comparison measurement(s), a POSITA would look to Martinez, who teaches the VI current/voltage probes, and further implement to Matsumoto’s measurement method and De Chambirier’s before/after comparison logic. The predictable result of this combination is an accurate, real-time plasma diagnostic system capable of extracting current flowing through the plasma sheath by subtracting the baseline circuit response (measured via the VI probes in the OFF state) from the combined system response (measured via the VI probes in the ON state). This combination applies a known technique (De Chambirier’s parameter comparison logic) and known physical sensors (Martinez’s VI probes) to a known methods (Matsumoto’s baseline vs. active measurement) to yield the predictable result (KSR) of isolating the current vector of the plasma.
Matsumoto, in combination with De Chambirier, and Martinez are silent in regard to:
step (C) of measuring current flowing through the plasma by vector operation using the magnitude and phase of the current included in the measured first current and second current,
wherein the step (A) includes calculating a phase shift occurring in the measurement circuit by calculating a deviation of the phase of the measured first current from a value that is 90 degrees ahead of a phase of the AC voltage, and
However, Matsumoto, in combination with Dible, further teach:
step (C) of measuring current flowing through the plasma by vector operation using the magnitude and phase of the current included in the measured first current and second current (Matsumoto: [0085]-[0092], [0095]-[0096], & [0099]: teaches processing the complex reflection coefficients (vector quantities) from steps (A) and (B) to extract a plasma parameter (electron density), where the “vector operation” is performed by the VNA and control unit to obtain the normalized imaginary part (Γi) or phase, and then find the resonance frequency, measuring the plasma impedance, from which current can be derived; Dible: [Abstract], [Col. 2, ll. 27-39], [Col. 5, ll. 40-53], [Col. 6, ll. 3-14], [Claim 1], [Claim 8], & [Claim 15]),
wherein the step (A) includes calculating a phase shift occurring in the measurement circuit by calculating a deviation of the phase of the measured first current from a value that is 90 degrees ahead of a phase of the AC voltage (Martinez: [0095]-[0096] & [0099]: tracks the imaginary shift (phase) across the zero-cross point to find resonance shifts; Dible: [Col. 4, ll. 28-59], [Col. 5, ll. 40-53], & [Col. 7, ll. 47-53]: teaches calculating phase deviations using mixer circuits), and
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate modify the plasma state measurement method of Matsumoto by incorporating the vector and phase subtraction operations taught by Dible, according to known methods. A POSITA would have been motivated to apply Dible’s vector subtraction and phase difference logic to the complex reflection data obtained by Matsumoto. Taking Matsumoto’s baseline circuit state (magnitude of the first current and the calculated phase shift) and subtracting it from the active plasma ON state (magnitude of the second current) using Dible’s vector subtraction methodologies. This combination applies a known RF signal processing technique (Dible’s vector phase subtraction) to a known method of collecting electrical states (Matsumoto’s ON/OFF plasma measurements). The predictable result (KSR) is a mathematical calculation/isolation of current flowing through the plasma, allowing the system to remove inherent phase shift and baseline magnitude of the measurement circuit.
However, Matsumoto, in combination with Martinez, and Dible, further teach:
wherein the step (C) includes measuring the current flowing through the plasma by subtracting the magnitude of the first current and the phase shift from the magnitude of the second current (Matsumoto: [0099]; Martinez: [0041]-[0044]; Dible: [Abstract], [Col. 2, ll. 27-60], [Col. 4, ll. 28-59], [Col. 5, ll. 40-53], [Col. 7, ll. 47-53], & [Claim 15]).
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 plasma state measurement method of Matsumoto by incorporating the radio frequency circuitry of Martinez and the vector and phase subtraction operations taught by Dible, according to known methods. A POSITA would have been motivated to replace or supplement Matsumoto’s network analyzer with the VI current/voltage probes taught by Martinez to obtain a real-time measurement of the actual RF currents flowing through the transmission line and the load. A POSITA would further look to Dible, who teaches specific RF signal processing techniques, disclosing the methods to differentiate a phase difference between distinct RF signals and utilizing phase/vector subtraction. Applying Dible’s vector subtraction techniques to complex current data obtained via Martinez’s probes. This combination applies a known hardware implementation (Martinez’s VI probes) and a known RF signal processing technique (Dible’s vector subtraction) to a known diagnostic methodology (Matsumoto’s baseline vs. active measurement). The predictable result (KSR) is a real-time plasma diagnostic system capable of calculating the current flowing through the plasma by using subtracting the baseline circuit response (the magnitude and phase shift of the first current measured via the VI probes) from the combined system response (the magnitude of the second current measured via the VI probes).
Regarding dependent claim 4, Matsumoto teaches:
The plasma measurement method of claim 1 (Fig. 1; [Title], [Abstract], [0001], [0076], [0081], [0085]-[0091], [0124], & [0147]), further comprising:
step (D) of deriving at least any one of electron density, electron temperature, or ion density of the plasma indicating the plasma state (Fig. 20; [Title], [Abstract], [0094], & [0096]-[0101]: entire purpose of invention is to derive electron density (Ne), figured further illustrates in step S5, calculating electron density), on the basis of the measured current flowing through the plasma (Matsumoto: [0002]-[0007], [0085]-[0091], [0094, & [0096]-[0101]: teaches deriving electron density based on a complex reflection coefficient, which is measured using incident and reflected currents, derivation is on the basis of measured currents that are a direct function of the current flowing through the plasma).
Matsumoto, is silent in regard to:
on the basis of the measured current flowing through the plasma.
However, Matsumoto, in combination with Martinez, further teach:
on the basis of the measured current flowing through the plasma (Matsumoto: [0002]-[0007], [0085]-[0091], [0094, & [0096]-[0101]: teaches deriving electron density based on a complex reflection coefficient, which is measured using incident and reflected currents, derivation is on the basis of measured currents that are a direct function of the current flowing through the plasma; Martinez: [0065]).
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 plasma state measurement method of Matsumoto by incorporating/supplementing the radio frequency sensor circuitry and parameter derivation of Martinez, according to known methods. A POSITA would have been motivated to apply the VI sensor hardware and computational derivations of Martinez to calculate electron density and temperature to provide an accurate real-time physical mechanism of measurements. The combination provides the predictable result of a plasma processing apparatus where RF current sensors are utilized to calculate the electron density and temperature of the plasma. This combination applies a known sensing technique and hardware implementation (Martinez’s VI probes and density/temperature calculations) to a known diagnostic method (Matsumoto’s baseline vs. active measurement) to yield the predictable result (KSR) of accurately characterizing the physical state of the plasma.
Regarding dependent claims 6, 8, & 9 Matsumoto teaches:
The plasma measurement method of claims 1 & 4 (Fig. 1; [Abstract], [0001], [0076], [0081], [0085]-[0091], [0124], & [0147]),
Matsumoto, is silent in regard to:
wherein, in step (A), the first current is repeatedly measured regularly or irregularly in a state where no plasma is generated.
However, Matsumoto, in combination with De Chambirier, further teach:
wherein, in step (A), the first current is repeatedly measured regularly or irregularly in a state where no plasma is generated (Matsumoto: Figs. 4, 20, & 21; [0004]-[0007], [0018]-[0019], [0029], [0085]-[0091], [0094]-[0095], & [0111]-[0113]: teaches repeatedly measuring in the plasma “OFF” state, describes a batch process where the plasma-off measurement is performed sequentially at multiple locations; De Chambirier: [0108]-[0110], [0130]-[0131], & [Claim 18]).
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 plasma OFF state measurement step of Matsumoto to be performed (regularly or irregularly) as taught by De Chambirier, according to known methods. A POSITA would be motivated to implement the baseline plasma-OFF measurement of Matsumoto by repeatedly measuring the current to build a statistical reference as taught by De Chambirier. Generating a statistic of an electrical parameter requires the parameter to be repeatedly measured (regularly or irregularly) over time rather than relying on a single data point. This combination applies a known diagnostic method (Matsumoto’s baseline when no plasma is generated) to a known diagnostic method of monitoring RF networks and diagnosing deviations (De Chambirier’s collection of statistic voltage, current, and phase data) to yield the predictable result of an accurate, continuously updated baseline that prevents drift from corrupting the final calculations of the plasma’s electron density and temperature.
Regarding dependent claims 12, 14, & 15 Matsumoto teaches:
The plasma measurement method of claims 1 & 4 (Figs. 1 & 2; [Abstract], [0001], [0028], [0040], [0074], [0076]-[0077], [0081], [0085]-[0091], [0124], & [0147]), wherein the probe device is installed ([0076]-[0077] & [0084]-[0091]) in an opening formed in a wall (Figs. 1 & 2; [0076]-[0077] & [0104]) of a processing container of the plasma processing apparatus ([0002], [0076]-[0077], & [0104]) via a sealing member that seals between a vacuum space and an atmospheric space ([0074] & [0076]-[0079]: discloses the probe apparatus, which includes the insulating pipe 50 housing the coaxial probe 52a, installed in an opening (through holes 10a), formed in the wall of the processing container (chamber 10), and using a sealing member (O-rings 58) to hold the probe in an airtight sealing manner).
Claims 5, 10, & 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto, in view of De Chambirier, in view of Martinez, in view of Dible, and further in view of Ikeda et al. (US 2021/0074517 A1, Pub. Date Mar. 11, 2021, hereinafter, Ikeda).
Regarding dependent claim 5, Matsumoto teaches:
The plasma measurement method of claim 4 (Fig. 1; [Abstract], [0001], [0076], [0081], [0085]-[0091], [0101], [0124], & [0147]),
Matsumoto, in combination with De Chambirier, Martinez, and Dible, are silent in regard to:
wherein, in step (D), a first current of a first harmonic of frequency of the AC voltage and a first current of a second harmonic of frequency of the AC voltage are calculated by frequency analysis from the measured current flowing through the plasma, and
at least any one of the electron density, the electron temperature, or the ion density of the plasma is derived using the calculated first current of the first harmonic and the calculated first current of the second harmonic.
However, Ikeda, further teaches:
wherein, in step (D), a first current of a first harmonic of frequency of the AC voltage and a first current of a second harmonic of frequency of the AC voltage are calculated by frequency analysis from the measured current flowing through the plasma (Fig. 2; [0035], [0041]-[0042], & [0044]-[0045]: teaches applying frequency analysis FFT to the measured current to calculate the amplitude components of the frequencies), and
at least any one of the electron density, the electron temperature, or the ion density of the plasma is derived using the calculated first current of the first harmonic and the calculated first current of the second harmonic ([0045], [0050]-[0051], [0053], & [0055]-[0056]).
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 plasma state measurement method of Matsumoto by incorporating/supplementing with the measurement circuitry of Martinez, the vector subtraction logic of Dible, and the harmonic frequency analysis operations taught by Ikeda, according to known methods. Ikeda teaches that due to the current-voltage characteristic of a plasma sheath being non-linear, the optimal way to derive electron temperature (Te), ion density (ni), and electron density (Ne) from an AC probe is to perform frequency analysis (FFT) on the measured current. A POSITA would be motivated to feed the isolated plasma current (obtained via the Matsumoto/Martinez/Dible combined framework) into the Fourier-transform analysis controller taught by Ikeda. This combination applies a known signal-processing technique (Ikeda’s FFT harmonic analysis) to a known diagnostic data stream (isolated AC plasma current) to yield the predictable result (KSR) of deriving the electron density, ion density, and electron temperature.
Regarding dependent claim 10 Matsumoto teaches:
The plasma measurement method of claim 5 (Fig. 1; [Abstract], [0001], [0076], [0081], [0085]-[0091], [0124], & [0147]),
Matsumoto, is silent in regard to:
wherein, in step (A), the first current is repeatedly measured regularly or irregularly in a state where no plasma is generated.
However, Matsumoto, in combination with De Chambirier, further teach:
wherein, in step (A), the first current is repeatedly measured regularly or irregularly in a state where no plasma is generated (Matsumoto: Figs. 4, 20, & 21; [0004]-[0007], [0018]-[0019], [0029], [0085]-[0091], [0094]-[0095], & [0111]-[0113]: teaches repeatedly measuring in the plasma “OFF” state, describes a batch process where the plasma-off measurement is performed sequentially at multiple locations; De Chambirier: [0108]-[0110], [0130]-[0131], & [Claim 18]).
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 plasma OFF state measurement step of Matsumoto to be performed (regularly or irregularly) as taught by De Chambirier, according to known methods. A POSITA would be motivated to implement the baseline plasma-OFF measurement of Matsumoto by repeatedly measuring the current to build a statistical reference as taught by De Chambirier. Generating a statistic of an electrical parameter requires the parameter to be repeatedly measured (regularly or irregularly) over time rather than relying on a single data point. This combination applies a known diagnostic method (Matsumoto’s baseline when no plasma is generated) to a known diagnostic method of monitoring RF networks and diagnosing deviations (De Chambirier’s collection of statistic voltage, current, and phase data) to yield the predictable result of an accurate, continuously updated baseline that prevents drift from corrupting the final calculations of the plasma’s electron density and temperature.
Regarding dependent claim 16 Matsumoto teaches:
The plasma measurement method of claim 5 (Figs. 1 & 2; [Abstract], [0001], [0028], [0040], [0074], [0076]-[0077], [0081], [0085]-[0091], [0124], & [0147]), wherein the probe device is installed ([0076]-[0077] & [0084]-[0091]) in an opening formed in a wall (Figs. 1 & 2; [0076]-[0077] & [0104]) of a processing container of the plasma processing apparatus ([0002], [0076]-[0077], & [0104]) via a sealing member that seals between a vacuum space and an atmospheric space ([0074] & [0076]-[0079]: discloses the probe apparatus, which includes the insulating pipe 50 housing the coaxial probe 52a, installed in an opening (through holes 10a), formed in the wall of the processing container (chamber 10), and using a sealing member (O-rings 58) to hold the probe in an airtight sealing manner).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto, in view of De Chambirier, in view of Martinez, in view of Dible, and further in view of Hopkins et al. (US 2022/0196558 A1, Pub. Date Jun. 23, 2022, hereinafter, Hopkins).
Regarding dependent claim 11, Matsumoto teaches:
The plasma measurement method of claim 1 (Fig. 1; [Abstract], [0001], [0076], [0081], [0085]-[0091] & [0095]),
Matsumoto, in combination with De Chambirier, Martinez, and Dible, are silent in regard to:
wherein, in step (A), the phase shift is calculated on the basis of the latest measured phase of the first current.
However, Matsumoto, in combination with Hopkins, further teach:
wherein, in step (A), the phase shift is calculated on the basis of the latest measured phase of the first current (Matsumoto: Figs. 4, 20, & 21; [0004]-[0007], [0085]-[0091] & [0094]-[0095]: establishes baseline phase shift derived from the first current (plasma off); Hopkins: [0069], [0079], [0092]-[0093], & [0116]: teaches comparing the most recent value against baselines).
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 baseline phase measurement step of Matsumoto by incorporating the dynamic phase shift calculation logic taught by Hopkins, according to known methods. A POSITA would be motivated to apply the dynamic phase rotation algorithm of Hopkins to the phase shift baseline calculation of Matsumoto by implementing the calculation of the phase shift based on the most recently processed reference measurement (the latest measured phase) to align successive RF signals. The predictable result (KSR) of this combination is an optimized measurement circuit that recalculates its baseline phase shift using the most recent available data, preventing thermal or electrical drift from corrupting the final plasma state.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto, in view of De Chambirier, in view of Martinez, in view of Dible, and further in view of Yu (KR 102268290 B1, Pub. Date Jun. 23, 2021, hereinafter, Yu).
Regarding independent claim 17, Matsumoto teaches:
A plasma processing apparatus (Figs. 1 & 2; [Abstract], [0001], [0071], [0075]-[0076], [0081], [0085]-[0091], [0124] & [0147]: teaches a plasma processing apparatus (e.g., capacitively coupled parallel plate type)) comprising a probe device (Figs. 1 & 2; [0075]-[0078]: teaches an antenna probe (e.g., probe portion 52a of coaxial cable 52)),
PNG
media_image6.png
802
526
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Matsumoto, in combination with De Chambirier, Martinez, and Dible, are silent in regard to:
a measurement circuit including a signal transmitter that outputs an AC voltage, and a control device having a communication part and a control part,
wherein the communication part receives a first current including a magnitude and phase of current measured in the measurement circuit when the AC voltage is output from the signal transmitter to the probe device, in a state where no plasma is generated in the plasma processing apparatus,
wherein the communication part further receives a second current including a magnitude and phase of current measured in the measurement circuit when the AC voltage is output from the signal transmitter to the probe device, in a state where plasma is generated in the plasma processing apparatus, and
However, Matsumoto, in combination with Yu, further teach:
a measurement circuit including a signal transmitter that outputs an AC voltage (Matsumoto: [Abstract], [0076] & [0085]-[0091]), and a control device having a communication part and a control part (Matsumoto: [0087]-[0092]: teaches a measurement control unit 74 which receives data and perform control/calculation processes; Yu: Fig. 3; [0067]-[0069]: control device (diagnostic system 300) having a communication part (communication unit 310) and a control part (control unit 330)),
wherein the communication part receives a first current including a magnitude and phase of current measured in the measurement circuit when the AC voltage is output from the signal transmitter to the probe device, in a state where no plasma is generated in the plasma processing apparatus (Matsumoto: Figs. 4, 20, & 21; [0004]-[0007], [0071], [0075]-[0076], [0078], [0085]-[0095], [0143], & [0151]-[0152]: teaches obtaining a first frequency characteristic of the complex reflection coefficient (contains magnitude and phase data) in a plasma OFF” state, of a “complex reflection coefficient” (Γ = Γr + jΓi) is defined by the magnitude and phase of the reflected wave relative to the incident wave, measuring this is directly equivalent to measuring the magnitude and phase of the current/voltage in the circuit, as the reflection coefficient is derived from these measurements; Yu: Fig. 4 [0068]-[0069] & [0084]-[0085]: communication part (communication unit 310) receives the incoming sensor/current data from the measurement circuit),
wherein the communication part further receives a second current including a magnitude and phase of current measured in the measurement circuit when the AC voltage is output from the signal transmitter to the probe device, in a state where plasma is generated in the plasma processing apparatus (Matsumoto: Figs. 5 & 20; [0071], [0075]-[0076], [0078], [0085]-[0095], & [0155]-[0156]: teaches obtaining a second frequency characteristic (contains magnitude and phase data) of a complex reflection coefficient in a plasma “ON” state; Yu: [0068]-[0069], [0085], & [0087]-[0091]: teaches the communication part (communication unit 310) receives sensor data in real-time while plasma is generated), and
PNG
media_image7.png
747
1338
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
407
569
media_image8.png
Greyscale
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 plasma processing and measurement apparatus of Matsumoto by incorporating the diagnostic control architecture taught by Yu, according to known methods. A POSITA would be motivated to equip Matsumoto’s diagnostic apparatus with the communication part and control part computing architecture of Yoo to upgrade the generalized network analyzer of Matsumoto into an automated industrial control system capable of continuously received the first and second current measurements (via the communication part) and automatically executing the required phase shift calculations. This combination applies a known, industry-standard controller architecture, Yu’s communication and control parts, to a known diagnostic apparatus, Matsumoto’s baseline vs. active measurement system. The predictable result (KSR) is a fully automated, real-time plasma diagnostic apparatus capable of continuously monitoring sensor inputs and calculating the physical state of the plasma during semiconductor manufacturing operations.
Matsumoto, in combination with De Chambirier, and Martinez, are silent in regard to:
wherein the control part calculates a phase shift occurring in the measurement circuit by calculating a deviation of the phase of the measured first current from a value that is 90 degrees ahead of a phase of the AC voltage,
However, Matsumoto, in combination with Dible, and Yu, further teach:
wherein the control part calculates a phase shift occurring in the measurement circuit by calculating a deviation of the phase of the measured first current from a value that is 90 degrees ahead of a phase of the AC voltage (Matsumoto: [0095]-[0096] & [0099]; Dible: [Col. 4, ll. 28-59], [Col. 5, ll. 40-53], & [Col. 7, ll. 47-53]; Yu: [0083] & [0087]-[0091]: communication part (communication unit 310) is the component that executes the calculations to generate diagnostic information),
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 plasma processing and measurement apparatus of Matsumoto by incorporating the diagnostic control architecture taught by Yu, and the vector subtraction operations taught by Dible, according to known methods. A POSITA would be motivated to equip Matsumoto’s diagnostic apparatus with the communication part and control part computing architecture of Yu to automate the continuous reception of the first and second currents. Then further obvious to program that control part to execute the vector subtraction and phase deviation math taught by Dible to isolate the current flowing through the plasma. This combination applies a known hardware architecture, Yu’s communication and control parts, and a known RF signal processing technique, Dible’s vector phase subtraction, to a known diagnostic apparatus, Matsumoto’s baseline vs. active measurement system. The predictable result (KSR) is an automated, real-time plasma diagnostic apparatus capable of continuously monitoring sensor inputs, vectorially subtracting baseline circuit noise, and calculating the physical state of the plasma during semiconductor manufacturing operations.
Matsumoto, in combination with De Chambirier, are silent in regard to:
wherein the control part further measures current flowing through the plasma by subtracting the magnitude of the first current and the phase shift from the magnitude of the second current by vector operation, and measures the plasma state on the basis of the measured current flowing through the plasma.
However, Martinez, in combination with Dible, and Yu, further teach:
wherein the control part further measures current flowing through the plasma by subtracting the magnitude of the first current and the phase shift from the magnitude of the second current by vector operation, and measures the plasma state on the basis of the measured current flowing through the plasma (Martinez: [0041]-[0045], [0065]-[0066], & [0068]; Dible: [Abstract], [Col. 2, ll. 27-39], [Col. 4, ll. 28-59], [Col. 5, ll. 40-53], [Col. 6, ll. 3-14], [Col. 7, ll. 47-53], [Claim 1], [Claim 8], & [Claim 15]: subtraction logic to remove the off-state baseline (first current and phase shift) from the active state (second current); Yu: [0067]-[0069] & [0087]-[0091]: control part (control unit 330) receives sensor current information from plasma).
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 plasma processing and measurement apparatus of Matsumoto by incorporating the radio frequency sensing hardware of Martinez, the diagnostic control architecture of Yu, and the vector subtraction operations taught by Dible, according to known methods. To optimize Matsumoto’s apparatus for real-time, continuous monitoring in an industrial semiconductor environment, A POSITA would be motivated to equip Matsumoto’s diagnostic apparatus with the VI sensors of Martinez, feed that sensor data into the dedicated communication and control parts taught by Yu, and program the control part to execute the vector subtraction operations taught by Dible. This combination applies known sensing hardware (Martinez), a known computing hardware (Yu), and known RF signal processing mathematics (Dible) to a known diagnostic apparatus (Matsumoto). The predictable result (KSR) is an automated, real-time plasma diagnostic apparatus capable of continuously monitoring sensor inputs, vectorially subtracting baseline circuit noise, and calculate the physical state of the plasma during manufacturing operations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUGO NAVARRO whose telephone number is (571)272-6122. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 08:30-5:00 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, Eman Alkafawi can be reached at 571-272-4448. 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.
/HUGO NAVARRO/ Examiner, Art Unit 2858 May 8, 2026
/EMAN A ALKAFAWI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858 5/14/2026
Prosecution Insights