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 .
Specification
The specification is objected to because of the following informalities: the specification is missing a BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION section.
The following guidelines illustrate the preferred layout for the specification of a utility application. These guidelines are suggested for the applicant’s use.
Arrangement of the Specification
As provided in 37 CFR 1.77(b), the specification of a utility application should include the following sections in order. Each of the lettered items should appear in upper case, without underlining or bold type, as a section heading. If no text follows the section heading, the phrase “Not Applicable” should follow the section heading:
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT.
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM.
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION.
(1) Field of the Invention.
(2) Description of Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98.
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S).
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS (commencing on a separate sheet).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE (commencing on a separate sheet).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING. (See MPEP § 2422.03 and 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825). A “Sequence Listing” is required on paper if the application discloses a nucleotide or amino acid sequence as defined in 37 CFR 1.821(a) and if the required “Sequence Listing” is not submitted as an electronic document either on read-only optical disc or as a text file via the patent electronic system.
Claim Objection
Claims 1, 11, and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, lines 18-19: please amend the typo “greater then” to – greater than –.
Claim 11, line 13: please amend repeated phrase “such that such that” to remove the redundant phrase.
Claim 16, line 20: please amend the typo “greater then” to – greater than –.
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 1-10 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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.
Regarding claims 1 and 16, the limitation reciting that “the annular region is defined as a region that is radially offset from the symmetry axis by a radial distance that is greater than the first radial distance [rd1] and is less than the second radial distance [rd2]” appears to be inconsistent with the disclosure and therefore unclear.
The specification describes the proximity mask inner sidewall as being located at the second radial distance (rd2) and the wafer clamp frame inner sidewall as being located at the first radial distance (rd1), with rd2 being less than rd1. Based on the specification, the annular region would appear to be the space radially greater than rd2 and less than rd1. As written, the language appears to reverse those bounds and may be a typographical error. Clarification is needed.
Claims 2-10 and 17-20 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on the rejected base claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-15 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record does not teach or suggest the cumulative limitations of claim 11, with particular emphasis on the limitations “wafer clamp assembly comprises … a proximity mask comprising a conductive material and having a cylindrical inner sidewall that radially protrudes inward from an inner sidewall of the wafer clamp frame such that an annular region is provided between an annular backside surface of the proximity mask and a front side of the wafer”, and “the proximity mask is electrically biased such that such that electrical field within a predominant fraction of an entire volume of the annular region has a distribution of a tilt angle relative to an axial direction that is greater than arctangent(0.1)”.
The closest prior art to the present application is Landau (US 6261433), Chen et al. (US 20080223724), and He (US 20140144781).
Landau teaches an apparatus and a method for achieving reliable, consistent metal electroplating or electrochemical deposition onto a wafer substrate. Landau recognizes the problem of the plating uniformity at the boundaries or edges of the substrate because of the fringing effects of the electrical field near the edge of the substrate (column 4, lines 29-33). Landau teaches an auxiliary electrode 84 (Fig. 2) disposed adjacent the electrolyte outlet to provide uniform deposition across the substrate surface and to shape as necessary the electrical field at the edge of the substrate and at the contacts. The auxiliary electrode can be broadly interpreted to read on the proximity mask.
Chen et al. teaches an electrochemical plating (ECP) apparatus and method with auxiliary cathodes, i.e., proximity masks, to create uniform electric flux density. Auxiliary cathodes 406a disposed outside the electrochemical cell 422 provide an auxiliary electrical field such that a flux line density at the center region of the substrate holder assembly substantially equals that at the circumference of the substrate holder assembly (paragraph 28; Fig. 4). Since the auxiliary cathodes provide an auxiliary electrical field such that a flux line density at the center region of the substrate holder assembly substantially equals that at the circumference of the substrate holder assembly, residue-free electro-deposition and uniformity control improvement can be achieved (paragraph 28).
He teaches an apparatus and method for electroplating a layer of metal onto the surface of a wafer. He teaches that a thieving secondary cathode 115, i.e., proximity mask, (Fig. 1A) is electrically connected to a power supply and is configured to be negatively biased at least during a portion of electroplating. The provided configuration effectively redistributes ionic current in the plating system allowing plating of uniform metal layers and mitigating the terminal effect.
However, none of Landau, Chen et al., or He teach or suggest the auxiliary electrode or cathode as part of a wafer clamp assembly, forming an annular region between an annular backside surface of the auxiliary electrode and a front side of the wafer, and biasing the auxiliary electrode such that electrical field within a predominant fraction of an entire volume of the annular region has a distribution of a tilt angle relative to an axial direction that is greater than arctangent(0.1).
Therefore claim 11 is patentably distinguished from the prior art of record. The prior art of record, whether taken alone or in combination, does not disclose nor render obvious the cumulative limitations of claim 11. Claims 12-15 are dependent from or otherwise include the limitations of claim 11 and are allowable for the same reasons above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUAN V VAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8521. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5:00.
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, Patricia Mallari can be reached at (571) 272-4729. 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.
/LUAN V VAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1795
Prosecution Insights