Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/453,378

PLASMA PROCESSING APPARATUS AND METHOD

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Aug 22, 2023
Priority
Dec 23, 2022 — RE 10-2022-0183218
Examiner
YU, YUECHUAN
Art Unit
1718
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
5m
Est. Remaining
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% — above average
65%
Career Allowance Rate
340 granted / 521 resolved
At TC average
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
544
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
91.9%
+51.9% vs TC avg
§102
1.5%
-38.5% vs TC avg
§112
1.3%
-38.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 521 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 of species A/fig. 2 in the reply filed on 3/13/26 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not make any argument or traverse the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claims 11-20 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Upon further review, it was found that claim 4 is directed to non-elected species B/fig. 5 and claims 6-9 directed to non-elected species C/fig. 8, and are also withdrawn. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 3/13/26. 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, 2, 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Tien (US 5997589). Regarding claim 1. Tien teaches in the drawings a plasma processing apparatus (semiconductor fabrication chamber 51, col 5:48-67 which performs plasma processing, abstract, col 2:24-67, 3:1-60) comprising: a substrate chuck (ES chuck 57, col. 5:58-67) in a chamber (fig. 6, 57 inside the chamber space 53/54 of chamber 51, col 58-67); a restriction ring (baffle plate/member 52, shown in figs. 4ab, 5a-c as 30 and 40 with ring components 31/32 and 41/42, col. 6:1-15, with small flow openings, such as 44 in ring 41 and side cutouts in 31/32, that restrict pressure/create pressure differences col. 3:1-60) surrounding an outer perimeter of the substrate chuck (fig. 1-6, baffle ring 52 surrounds the chuck 57, similar to 12 and 17 in fig. 1, 2); a movable ring (fig. 4ab, either baffle ring plates 31/32 of 30 is rotatable, col. 5:37-47; fig. 5a-c, rotatable baffle ring 42, col 5:48-57) on the restriction ring (fig. 4ab, since the overlapped 31/32 are both rotatable, there is a rotatable overlapping ring, which appears to be 32/solid line, on the overlapped ring, which appears to be 31/dotted outline; similarly, fig. 5a-c col. 5:48-57, there is a rotating ring 42 on the lower side of fixed restriction/perforated plate 41); and an actuator (CPU 26, fig. 7, col. 6:25-42, which actuates/moves the baffle plates to adjust their flow openings) configured to move the movable ring, wherein grooves formed in the restriction ring are opened or closed by movement of the movable ring (as discussed, CPU controls the baffle plate opening size via adjusting the openings smaller or larger/i.e. closing and opening motions, which is done via control of the rotation of the at least one movable ring, fig. 4a, 5a, col. 5:37-57, col. 6:25-42, his claims 1-7). Regarding claim 2. Tien teaches the plasma processing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the movable ring has a ring shape (as discussed) extending along a side surface of the substrate chuck (fig. 4-5, each ring 31/32 and 42 is circular and matching in shape and follows/extends along the lower edge of 17/57. Fig. 1-2, 4-6) and comprises radial straight grooves (fig. 4ab 5a-c 31/32 having wide radial cutouts/grooves and 42 also having smaller radial cutouts) disposed at an interval (fig. 4, 5, showing the grooves are equally spread around each movable ring at equal intervals). Regarding claim 5. Tien teaches the plasma processing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the actuator is configured to rotate the movable ring (as prev discussed) to adjust an open-close ratio of a lower surface of the restriction ring covered by the movable ring (eg fig. 5a the opening amount/open-close ratio of 41’s lower surface where its holes 44 are located, is controlled by rotation of 42, as prev discussed, wherein the lower surface of 41 is covered by 42/dotted line). 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. Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tien (US 5997589) in view of Moon (US 20050224179). Regarding claim 3. Tien teaches the plasma processing apparatus of claim 2, but does not teach wherein the interval is between about 0.1 cm to about 2 cm. However, Moon teaches in [6] that the distance between the openings/slots affects the processing efficiency and manufacturing cost, and thus is a result effective parameter. It would be obvious to those skilled in the art at the time of invention to optimize the interval/distance between openings/slots to control the processing efficiency and manufacturing cost. For optimization of result effective parameter, see MPEP 2144.05. Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tien (US 5997589) in view of Wu (US 20050031796). Regarding claim 10. Tien teaches the plasma processing apparatus of claim 1, but does not teach further comprising: a sensor configured to sense plasma distribution inside the chamber; and a plasma generator configured to control an amount of plasma introduced into the chamber, based on a result sensed by the sensor. However Wu teaches in the abstract a sensor (sensors) configured to sense plasma distribution inside the chamber ([38, abstract]); and a plasma generator ([26-29] RF power source 44 generating high density plasma field) configured to control an amount of plasma introduced into the chamber (controls the amount of high density plasma introduced into the lower portion of the chamber/near wafer [29]), based on a result sensed by the sensor ([26-29] the output of 44 controlled via capacitors in response to the sensing). It would be obvious to those skilled in the art at the time of the invention to modify Tien to maintain spatial uniformity of plasma [abstract 7 8 24 31]. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YUECHUAN YU whose telephone number is (571)272-7190. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5. 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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at 571-272-5166. 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. /YUECHUAN YU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 22, 2023
Application Filed
May 08, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Jun 30, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 30, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12665172
GAS COOLED HIGH POWER CONNECTION ROD
3y 10m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12666918
SUBSTRATE SUPPORT DEVICE AND SUBSTRATE PROCESSING APPARATUS INCLUDING THE SAME
3y 1m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12665169
MODULAR HIGH-FREQUENCY SOURCE
2y 1m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12654181
GAS DISTRIBUTION FACEPLATE WITH OBLIQUE FLOW PATHS
3y 10m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12648382
SUBSTRATE PROCESSING METHOD AND PLASMA PROCESSING APPARATUS
4y 0m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
65%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+20.4%)
3y 4m (~5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 521 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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