Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/450,625

PLASMA PROCESSING DEVICE, PLASMA PROCESSING METHOD, AND SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE MANUFACTURING METHOD

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Aug 16, 2023
Examiner
CROWELL, ANNA M
Art Unit
1716
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Kioxia Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
45%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 10m
To Grant
76%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 45% of resolved cases
45%
Career Allow Rate
191 granted / 424 resolved
-20.0% vs TC avg
Strong +31% interview lift
Without
With
+31.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
463
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
56.0%
+16.0% vs TC avg
§102
19.1%
-20.9% vs TC avg
§112
13.2%
-26.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 424 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-11) in the reply filed on November 20, 2025 is acknowledged. Claims 12-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. 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. 99 Claim(s) 1-4 and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hisatomi et al. (U.S. 2020/0211823). Referring to Figure 1A and paragraphs [0038]-[0062], Hisatomi et al. disclose a plasma processing device, comprising: a chamber 10 (par.[0038]); a plurality of direct current power supplies 104, 115 provided in an upper portion 101 and on a side wall 11 of the chamber, wherein the direct current power supplies are configured to operate individually (pars.[0047],[0062]); and a controller 200 configured to control the direct current power supplies such that the direct current power supplies apply respective direct current voltages independent of each other. (pars.[0047],pars.[0054]-[0055]). With respect to claim 2, the plasma processing device of Hisatomi et al. further includes wherein the direct current power supplies include one or more upper direct current power supplies 104 provided in differing positions in the upper portion 101 of the chamber and each configured to apply a direct current voltage to the upper portion of the chamber, and one or more side wall direct current power supplies 115 provided in differing positions on the side wall 11of the chamber and each configured to apply a direct current voltage to the side wall of the chamber (Figs. 1A, 8A, pars.[0047],[0062]). With respect to claim 3, the plasma processing device according of Hisatomi et al. further comprising: a gas supplier 64, 66 configured to supply a gas into the chamber (par.[0045]); and a gas processor 34 including an electrode and configured to convert the gas into plasma (par.[0045]), wherein the controller 200 is further configured to control the direct current power supplies causing the direct current power supplies to apply the independent direct current voltages during a plasma processing (par.[0047]). With respect to claim 4, the plasma processing device of Hisatomi et al. further comprising a sensor (i.e. photodiode, photomicrosensor, photoelectric conversion element) configured to detect an amount of radicals in the chamber (par.[0060]), wherein the controller 200 is further configured to control the direct current power supplies causing the direct current power supplies to apply the independent direct current voltages based on the detected amount of radicals (pars.[0047],[0054]-[0055], [0060]). With respect to claim 10, the plasma processing device of Hisatomi et al. further includes wherein the controller 200 is further configured to control the direct current power supplies 104, 115 so as to apply a direct current in a predetermined cycle (par.[0055]). With respect to claim 11, the plasma processing device of Hisatomi et al. further includes wherein the gas includes a fluorocarbon gas (par.[0051]). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 Claim(s) 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hisatomi et al. (U.S. 2020/0211823) in view of Miya et al. (U.S. 2008/0110569). The teachings of Hisatomi et al. have been discussed above. Hisatomi et al. fail to teach the controller is further configured to calculate a spatial distribution of the radicals in the chamber based on the detected amount of radicals, and control the direct current power supplies causing the direct current power supplies to apply the independent direct current voltages based on the calculated spatial distribution. Referring to paragraphs [0034]-[0044], Miya et al. teach a plasma processing device wherein the controller is further configured to calculate a spatial distribution of the radicals in the chamber based on the detected amount of radicals in order to accurately control various components during the plasma etching process (pars.[0037]-[0039]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the apparatus of Hisatomi et al. with a controller that is further configured to calculate a spatial distribution of the radicals in the chamber based on the detected amount of radicals as taught by Miya et al. in order to accurately control various components during the plasma etching process. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to program the controller of Hisatomi et al. to control the direct current power supplies causing the direct current power supplies to apply the independent direct current voltages based on the calculated spatial distribution as taught by Miya et al. in order to accurately control the direct current power supplies during the plasma etching process. The resulting apparatus of Hisatomi et al. in view of Miya et al. would yield the controller is further configured to calculate a spatial distribution of the radicals in the chamber based on the detected amount of radicals, and control the direct current power supplies causing the direct current power supplies to apply the independent direct current voltages based on the calculated spatial distribution. With respect to claim 6, the plasma processing device of Hisatomi et al. in view of Miya et al. further includes wherein the controller is further configured to control each of the direct current power supplies to a corresponding position to raise the applied direct current voltage when a result of a detection by the sensor is equal to or lower than a first predetermined value, and control each of the direct current power supplies to a corresponding position to lower the applied direct current voltage when the result of the detection by the sensor is equal to greater than a second predetermined value, and the second predetermined value is higher than the first predetermined value (Hisatomi et al.-pars.[0055], Miya et al.-pars.[0037]-[0039]). With respect to claim 7, the plasma processing device of Hisatomi et al. in view of Miya et al. wherein the controller is configured to control the gas supplier such that an amount of the gas supplied is approximately the same in response to a result of a detection by the sensor (Miya et al.-par.[0039]). Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hisatomi et al. (U.S. 2020/0211823) in view of Honda et al. (U.S. 2007/0221493). The teachings of Hisatomi et al. have been discussed above. Hisatomi et al. fail to teach the controller is further configured to control the gas supplier in accordance with a timing of when the direct current voltages are applied. Referring to paragraphs [0084], [0091]-[0092], Honda et al. teach a plasma processing device the controller 52 is further configured to control the gas supplier 34 in accordance with a timing of when the direct current voltages 49 are applied in order to achieve the desired processing conditions for RIE processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the apparatus of Hisatomi et al. such that the controller is configured to control the gas supplier in accordance with a timing of when the direct current voltages are applied as taught by Honda et al. in order to achieve the desired processing conditions for RIE processing. With respect to claim 9, the plasma processing device of Hisatomi et al. in view of Honda et al. further includes wherein the controller 52 is further configured to control the gas supplier so as to reduce an amount of the gas supplied during applying the direct current voltages (Honda et al.-pars. [0084], [0091]-[0092]). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Nauman et al.’633, Koshimizu et al.’817, Mizota et al.’048, Bin Budiman et al.’813, Yokogawa et al.’560, Lee et al.’190, Koshimizu et al.’946, Itoh’008, and Song et al.’289 teach a controller for control direct current power supplies via sensor. Zhao et al.’218 teach a plurality of direct current power supplies, Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michelle CROWELL whose telephone number is (571)272-1432. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10:00am-6:00pm. 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, Parviz Hassanzadeh can be reached at 571-272-1435. 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. /Michelle CROWELL/Examiner, Art Unit 1716 /SYLVIA MACARTHUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 16, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603255
PLASMA PROCESSING APPARATUS AND PLASMA PROCESSING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604708
ATOMIC LAYER ETCH SYSTEMS FOR SELECTIVELY ETCHING WITH HALOGEN-BASED COMPOUNDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12555741
MAGNETIC HOUSING SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12548739
PLASMA SOURCE FOR SEMICONDUCTOR PROCESSING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12525439
APPARATUS FOR PLASMA PROCESSING AND METHOD OF ETCHING
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
45%
Grant Probability
76%
With Interview (+31.0%)
3y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 424 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month