DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (apparatus), drawn to claims 1-9 and 19-20, in the reply filed on 02/06/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 10-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention (method), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 02/06/2026.
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) 1-9 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Inazawa et al (US 5,772,833).
Regarding claim 1:
Inazawa teaches a substrate treating apparatus (plasma etching apparatus) [fig 1 & col 4, lines 49-51] comprising: a process chamber (vacuum container, 2) configured to perform plasma treatment in a treatment space (3) [fig 1 & col 4, lines 49-56]; a substrate support (first electrode, 13) in a lower portion of the process chamber (2) and configured to support a substrate (semiconductor wafer, 1) [fig 1 & col 5-6, lines 63-10]; a showerhead (top wall of 2) in an upper portion of the process chamber (2) and configured to supply (via a plurality of supplying holes 11) a process gas (process gas) for the plasma treatment toward the substrate (1) [fig 1 & col 5, lines 12-20]; and a baffle (ring member, 17) surrounding the substrate support (13), wherein the substrate support (13) functions as a first electrode (first electrode) for generating plasma (plasma is produced), the showerhead (top wall of 2) and the baffle (17) function as a second electrode (anode electrode) for generating the plasma, the baffle (17) has a variable height (moved vertically by means of the lifting mechanism 101), and an area of the second electrode (an area of the anode electrode) in contact with the treatment space varies as a height of the baffle varies (changed by vertically moving the lifting mechanism 101) [fig 1 & col 6, lines 33-54].
Regarding claims 2-3:
Inazawa teaches radio-frequency (RF) power (via 20) is applied to the substrate support (13) [fig 1 & col 6, lines 11-32]; and wherein a frequency of the RF power is selected in a range of about 1 Mhz to about 60 Mhz (having a radio of 1MHz to 100 MHz) [fig 1 & col 6, lines 11-32].
Although taught by the cited prior art, the claim limitations “radio-frequency (RF) power (via 20) is applied to the substrate support” and “wherein a frequency of the RF power is selected in a range of about 1 Mhz to about 60 Mhz” are merely intended use and are given weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the intended use. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987).
Regarding claim 4:
Inazawa teaches a raising/lowering device (lifting mechanism, 101) configured to vertically raise and lower the baffle (17) [fig 1 & col 6, lines 33-54].
Regarding claims 5 and 20:
The claim limitations “wherein a maximum height of the baffle is equal to a height of the substrate supported by the substrate support” does not impart any additional structure. Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim. Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969). Furthermore, inclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. In re Young, 75 F.2d 996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963)). The apparatus is capable of meeting the limitations of the claim because one may process a substrate of any height desired.
Regarding claim 6:
Inazawa teaches the showerhead (top wall of 2) and the baffle (17) comprise a ground electrode (anode electrode) [fig 1 & col 6, lines 33-54].
Regarding claims 7-8:
Inazawa teaches a liner (cylindrical member, 4) on side walls of the process chamber (2), wherein the liner (4) functions as the second electrode (anode electrode) [fig 1 & col 6, lines 33-54]; and wherein the liner (4) comprises a ground electrode (anode electrode) [fig 1 & col 6, lines 33-54].
Regarding claim 9:
The claim limitations “wherein the plasma treatment comprises plasma etching, plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition, or a combination thereof” are merely intended use and are given weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the intended use. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987).
Regarding claim 19:
Inazawa teaches a substrate treating apparatus (plasma etching apparatus) [fig 1 & col 4, lines 49-51] comprising: a process chamber (vacuum container, 2) configured to perform plasma treatment in a treatment space (3) [fig 1 & col 4, lines 49-56]; a substrate support (first electrode, 13) in a lower portion of the process chamber (2) and configured to support a substrate (semiconductor wafer, 1) [fig 1 & col 5-6, lines 63-10]; a showerhead (top wall of 2) in an upper portion of the process chamber (2) and configured to supply (via a plurality of supplying holes 11) a process gas (process gas) for the plasma treatment toward the substrate (1) [fig 1 & col 5, lines 12-20]; a liner (cylindrical member, 4) on side walls of the process chamber (2) and configured to protect side walls of the process chamber (2) [fig 1 & col 6, lines 33-54]; and a baffle (ring member, 17) surrounding the substrate support (13), wherein the substrate support (13) functions as a first electrode (first electrode), to which radio-frequency (RF) power having a frequency of 13.56 Mhz (13.56 MHz) is applied, to generate plasma (plasma is produced) [fig 1 & col 6, lines 11-54 and col 8, lines 1-6], the showerhead (top wall of 2), the baffle (17), and the liner (4) function as a second electrode (anode electrode), which includes a ground electrode (see fig 1), to generate the plasma, the baffle (17) has a variable height (moved vertically by means of the lifting mechanism 101), an area of the second electrode (an area of the anode electrode) in contact with the treatment space varies as a height of the baffle varies (changed by vertically moving the lifting mechanism 101) [fig 1 & col 6, lines 33-54].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Honda et al (JP 2011228694), Yen et al (US 6,527,911), Oyabu (US 6,673,196), Higashiura et al (US 2004/0255863), and Hayashi et al (US 2005/0000442) teach a substrate treating apparatus [fig 1, 5, 1, 1, and 1, respectively].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN R KENDALL whose telephone number is (571)272-5081. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thurs 9-5 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, William F Kraig can be reached at (571)272-8660. 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.
/Benjamin Kendall/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896