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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the
“bipolar voltage output” in claims 6-8 and 16-17
“unipolar voltage output” in claims 9 and 18
“second voltage source” in claims 9 and 18
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-3 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Horsky, et. al. (US 20100148089 A1; from IDS filed 05/13/2025), hereinafter Horsky.
Regarding claim 1, Horsky teaches a vaporizer, comprising: a crucible having a plurality of walls that define a crucible chamber (crucible 18 is surrounded by walls of machined aluminum body 29, [0174], [0177], Fig. 3A); and a thermoelectric device disposed against at least one wall of the crucible (thermoelectric (TE) cooler 30, [0107], [0177], Fig. 3A).
Regarding claim 12, Horsky teaches an ion implantation system (ion implantation system [0076], Fig. 8), comprising:
an ion source to generate an ion beam (ion source 1, [0172], Fig. 3);
one or more beamline components located downstream from the ion source to direct the ion beam toward a workpiece holder (Fig. 8, Fig. 8A); and
a vaporizer in communication with the ion source to supply a dopant vapor to the ion source (vaporizer 2, Fig. 3A, [0175]);
wherein the vaporizer comprises a crucible chamber (crucible 18, [0174], Fig. 3A) to hold a dopant material (solid feed material decaborane 19, [0174, Fig. 3A) and a thermoelectric device disposed against at least one wall of the crucible chamber (thermoelectric (TE) cooler 30 is connected on wall of machined aluminum body 29, [0107], [0177], Fig. 3A).
Regarding claim 2, Horsky teaches further comprising an isothermal block (aluminum body 29, [0177], Fig. 3A), wherein the thermoelectric device is disposed between the isothermal block and the at least one wall (Fig. 3A shows thermoelectric cooler 30 disposed between the body of 29 and the walls of 29).
Regarding claim 13, Horsky teaches wherein the vaporizer comprises an isothermal block (aluminum body 29, [0177], Fig. 3A), wherein the thermoelectric device is disposed between the isothermal block and the at least one wall (Fig. 3A shows thermoelectric cooler 30 disposed between the body of 29 and the walls of 29).
Regarding claim 3, Horsky teaches wherein the isothermal block is maintained at a near constant temperature ([0177]).
Regarding claim 14, wherein the isothermal block is maintained at a near constant temperature ([0177]).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 4-8 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horsky (US 20100148089 A1), in view of Lim, et. al. (US 20150377526 A1), hereinafter Lim.
Regarding claim 4, Horsky teaches wherein the thermoelectric device is configured to cool the at least one wall ([0107], [0177], Fig. 3A).
Although Horsky does teach heating the at least one wall (resistive heater plate 20 conducts heat to 29, [0177], Fig. 3A), Horsky does not teach that the thermoelectric device is configured to perform this heating in a first mode.
Lim teaches wherein the thermoelectric device is configured to heat the at least one wall in a first mode and cool the at least one wall in a second mode ([0018]).
Lim modifies Horsky by suggesting incorporating a thermoelectric device that performs heating in a first mode and cooling in a second mode to heat or cool the at least one wall of Horsky.
Since Horsky and Lim are both directed to thermoelectric elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Lim because a thermoelectric cooler that can provide heating or cooling as thermal output can be used to heat or cool as desired in order to stabilize the temperature of temperature-sensitive devices (Lim, [0002]).
Regarding claim 5, Horsky teaches wherein an outlet from the crucible chamber is disposed near the at least one wall (part of crucible 18 in Fig. 3A that connects to inlet channel 15, [0172]-[0174]), such that in the second mode, cooling of the at least one wall allows vapor from a dopant material disposed within the crucible chamber to condense in the outlet, so as to inhibit flow of vapor from the crucible chamber to an ion source ([0085]).
Regarding claim 15, Horsky teaches wherein the vaporizer is adapted to operate in two modes, wherein, in a first mode, at least a portion of the crucible chamber is heated (heating by resistive or ohmic heater, [0107]), and wherein at least a portion of the crucible chamber is actively cooled by the thermoelectric device to cause condensation of the dopant vapor ([0107], [0085]).
Horsky does not teach that the heating is performed by a thermoelectric device.
Lim teaches heating by a thermoelectric device that is capable of both heating and cooling ([0018]).
Lim modifies Horsky by suggesting incorporating a thermoelectric device capable of a heating mode and a cooling mode to performing the heating and cooling modes of Horsky to heat and cool the vaporizer of Horsky.
Since Horsky and Lim are both directed to thermoelectric elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Lim because a thermoelectric cooler that can provide heating or cooling as thermal output can be used to heat or cool as desired in order to stabilize the temperature of temperature-sensitive devices (Lim, [0002]).
Regarding claim 6, Horsky teaches further comprising a thermal controller in communication with the thermoelectric device (closed-loop temperature control system with proportional integral differential (PID) controller, [0097], [0174]),
Horsky does not explicitly teach the thermal controller comprising a bipolar voltage output to allow operation in the first mode and the second mode.
Lim teaches the thermal controller comprising a bipolar voltage output to allow operation in the first mode and the second mode (control circuit 240 of TEC controls the voltage polarity of the TEC 210 via H-bridge to control the direction for heating or cooling, [0023]).
Lim modifies Horsky by suggesting that the thermal controller comprises a bipolar voltage output to allow operation in heating or cooling modes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Lim because a bipolar voltage output provided by an H-bridge of the controller allows the voltage polarity and consequently the direction of current to be changed to alternate between heating and cooling when desired, (Lim, [0023], [0018]).
Regarding claim 16, Horsky teaches wherein the vaporizer comprises a thermal controller in communication with the thermoelectric device (closed-loop temperature control system with proportional integral differential (PID) controller, [0097], [0174]),
Horsky does not explicitly teach the thermal controller comprising a bipolar voltage output to allow operation in the first mode and the second mode.
Lim teaches the thermal controller comprising a bipolar voltage output to allow operation in the first mode and the second mode (control circuit 240 of TEC controls the voltage polarity of the TEC 210 via H-bridge to control the direction for heating or cooling, [0023]).
Lim modifies Horsky by suggesting that the thermal controller comprises a bipolar voltage output to allow operation in heating or cooling modes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Lim because a bipolar voltage output provided by an H-bridge of the controller allows the voltage polarity and consequently the direction of current to be changed to alternate between heating and cooling when desired, (Lim, [0023], [0018]).
Regarding claim 7, Horsky does not explicitly teach wherein a direction of DC current from the bipolar voltage output determines a mode of operation and an amplitude of the DC current determines an amount of heating or cooling provided by the thermoelectric device.
Lim teaches wherein a direction of DC current from the bipolar voltage output determines a mode of operation and an amplitude of the DC current determines an amount of heating or cooling provided by the thermoelectric device ([0018]).
Lim modifies Horsky by suggesting a direction of current determines heating or cooling, while the magnitude of current determines the thermal output.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Lim because the configuration of Lim allows for control over the direction and magnitude of current which in turn controls the thermal output as desired, (Lim, [0023], [0018]).
Regarding claim 17, Horsky does not explicitly teach wherein a direction of DC current from the bipolar voltage output determines a mode of operation and an amplitude of the DC current determines an amount of heating or cooling provided by the thermoelectric device.
Lim teaches wherein a direction of DC current from the bipolar voltage output determines a mode of operation and an amplitude of the DC current determines an amount of heating or cooling provided by the thermoelectric device ([0018]).
Lim modifies Horsky by suggesting a direction of current determines heating or cooling, while the magnitude of current determines the thermal output.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Lim because the configuration of Lim allows for control over the direction and magnitude of current which in turn controls the thermal output as desired, (Lim, [0023], [0018]).
Regarding claim 8, Horsky teaches further comprising a temperature sensor disposed against one wall of the crucible chamber (thermocouple 25 continually monitors the temperature of the crucible 18, [0174], Fig. 3A), wherein the thermal controller uses information from the temperature sensor to control the PID controller of the closed-loop temperature control system ([0097], [0174]).
Horsky does not explicitly teach a bipolar voltage output.
Lim teaches a bipolar voltage output ([0023]).
Lim modifies Horsky by suggesting the controller of the thermoelectric device has a bipolar voltage output.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Lim because a bipolar voltage output provided by an H-bridge of the controller allows the voltage polarity and consequently the direction of current to be changed to alternate between heating and cooling when desired, (Lim, [0023], [0018])
Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horsky (US 20100148089 A1), in view of Byggmastar, et. al. (US 20210123823 A1), hereinafter Byggmastar.
Regarding claim 9, Horsky teaches further comprising a thermal controller in communication with the thermoelectric device (closed-loop temperature control system with proportional integral differential (PID) controller, [0097], [0174]).
Horsky does not explicitly teach the thermal controller comprising a unipolar voltage output to allow operation in the first mode; and a second voltage source to allow operation in the second mode.
Byggmastar teaches a unipolar voltage output to allow operation in the first mode; and a second voltage source to allow operation in the second mode ([0041] teaches the first voltage source 33 and second voltage source 34 are both unipolar, where each is independently controllable by the processor to be capable of heating or cooling, [0043]).
Byggmastar modifies Horsky by a unipolar voltage output to allow heating and a second voltage source to allow cooling.
Since both Horsky and Byggmastar are directed to thermoelectric/Peltier elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Byggmaster because such a configuration allows for controlled temperature calibration, (Byggmastar, Abstract, [0041], [0043])
Regarding claim 18, Horsky teaches wherein the vaporizer comprises a thermal controller in communication with the thermoelectric device (closed-loop temperature control system with proportional integral differential (PID) controller, [0097], [0174]).
Horsky does not explicitly teach the thermal controller comprising a unipolar voltage output to allow operation in the first mode; and a second voltage source to allow operation in the second mode.
Byggmastar teaches a unipolar voltage output to allow operation in the first mode; and a second voltage source to allow operation in the second mode ([0041] teaches the first voltage source 33 and second voltage source 34 are both unipolar, where each is independently controllable by the processor to be capable of heating or cooling, [0043]).
Byggmastar modifies Horsky by a unipolar voltage output to allow heating and a second voltage source to allow cooling.
Since both Horsky and Byggmastar are directed to thermoelectric/Peltier elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Byggmaster because such a configuration allows for controlled temperature calibration, (Byggmastar, Abstract, [0041], [0043])
Claims 10-11 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horsky (US 20100148089 A1), in view of Sasaki (WO 2023037948 A1; from IDS filed 05/13/2025, see paragraph numbers of translated document filed 05/13/2025).
Regarding claim 10, Horsky does not teach further comprising a secondary heater to supplement heat provided by the thermoelectric device in the first mode.
Sasaki teaches a secondary heater to supplement heat provided by the thermoelectric device in the first mode ([0016], [0031], Fig. 7).
Sasaki modifies Horsky by suggesting an additional heater to supplement the thermoelectric device used for heating.
Since both Sasaki and Horsky are directed to vaporizers, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Sasaki because using a first and second heater allows for more uniform temperature distribution in the vaporizer due to the heaters being provided at different position, (Sasaki, [0033]).
Regarding claim 19, Horsky does not teach wherein the vaporizer comprises a secondary heater to supplement heat provided to the crucible chamber by the thermoelectric device in the first mode.
Sasaki teaches wherein the vaporizer comprises a secondary heater to supplement heat provided by the thermoelectric device in the first mode ([0016], [0031], Fig. 7).
Sasaki modifies Horsky by suggesting an additional heater to supplement the thermoelectric device used for heating.
Since both Sasaki and Horsky are directed to vaporizers, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Sasaki because using a first and second heater allows for more uniform temperature distribution in the vaporizer due to the heaters being provided at different position, (Sasaki, [0033]).
Regarding claim 11, Horsky does not teach wherein the secondary heater comprises a second thermoelectric device, a resistive heater or heat pipes.
Sasaki teaches the secondary heater comprises a second thermoelectric device, a resistive heater or heat pipes (Fig. 7, [0031], [0037]).
Sasaki modifies Horsky by suggesting an additional heater comprising a heating resistor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Sasaki because the configuration of the second heater as a heating resistor is capable of heating the vaporization section, (Sasaki, [0037]).
Regarding claim 20, Horsky does not teach wherein the secondary heater comprises a second thermoelectric device, a resistive heater or heat pipes.
Sasaki teaches the secondary heater comprises a second thermoelectric device, a resistive heater or heat pipes (Fig. 7, [0031], [0037]).
Sasaki modifies Horsky by suggesting an additional heater comprising a heating resistor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Sasaki because the configuration of the second heater as a heating resistor is capable of heating the vaporization section, (Sasaki, [0037]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA E TANDY whose telephone number is (703)756-1720. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Robert Kim can be reached at 5712722293. 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.
LAURA E TANDY
Examiner
Art Unit 2881
/DAVID E SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Prosecution Insights