DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicants’ submission, filed on 06/10/2026, in response to claims 1-3 and 14 rejection from the non-final office action (03/11/2026), by amending claims 1 and 14 is entered and will be addressed below.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 4-13 remain withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention Group II and Species A and C-E, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Interpretation
The “a processing chamber configured to process a substrate having a predetermined film at an outer peripheral portion” of claim 3, an apparatus that is capable of performing processing at an outer peripheral portion of the substrate or capable of processing “a substrate having a predetermined film at an outer peripheral portion” is considered read into this portion of the claim.
It has been held that claim language that simply specifies an intended use or field of use for the invention generally will not limit the scope of a claim (Walter, 618 F.2d at 769, 205 USPQ at 409; MPEP 2106). Additionally, in apparatus claims, intended use must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim (In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); MPEP2111.02). When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent (In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977); MPEP 2112.01).
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.
Claims 1 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(1)(1) as being anticipated by Druz et al. (US 20090098306, hereafter ’306).
‘306 teaches all limitations of:
Claim 1: Apparatus For Surface Processing Of A Substrate Using An Energetic Particle Beam (title, includes the claimed “A plasma processing apparatus comprising”):
The processing apparatus 40 includes a vacuum chamber 46 that is isolated from the surrounding environment … A sealable port (not shown) is provided in the vacuum chamber 46 for accessing the interior of vacuum chamber 46 to exchange processed substrates 44 for unprocessed substrates 44 (Fig. 3, [0048], includes the claimed “a processing chamber configured to process a substrate”);
With continued reference to FIGS. 3 and 3A, the substrate 44 is held and supported by a two-stage fixture 55 having a rotational stage 56 adapted to rotate the substrate 44 in at least one rotational sense about an azimuthal axis 45 of the rotational stage 56 ([0052], includes the claimed “a stage disposed in the processing chamber and on which the substrate is placeable”);
The source 50 of beam 42 is any ion beam source capable of generating energetic particles for performing a thin film deposition, an etching process, a reactive ion etching process, a sputtering process, or other ion beam treatment ([0049], includes the claimed “a plasma generator configured to supply plasma to the processing chamber”);
A shield 52 may be located in an intervening position between the substrate 44 and the source 50 so that the aperture 54 is located in a plane that is substantially parallel to the plane of the substrate 44 ([0050], 2nd sentence), A translation stage 58 of fixture 55, which supports the rotational stage 56, is adapted to move or translate the substrate 44 linearly and bi-directionally (i.e., reversibly) relative to the aperture 54 ([0052], 3rd sentence, is capable of directing ion beam 42 to the peripheral portion of the substrate, Fig. 3 shows the shield 52 is farther away from the upper surface of the processing chamber relative to the source 50, includes the claimed “a first shielding plate, extended from an upper surface of the processing chamber relatively to the plasma generator, (i) faces the substrate placed on the stage, (ii) has an opening in at least a part of a position overlapping an outer peripheral portion of the substrate in an up-down direction, and (iii) shields the substrate from the plasma at the upper portion of the processing chamber; and an actuator configured to rotate the substrate and move the substate in a first lateral direction or a second lateral direction, so as to cause a position of the opening of the first shielding plate to expose a respective circumferential portion of the substrate” as the rotational stage 56 requires a rotational actuator, and by linearly translate the substrate to align the circumferential potion or the edge of the substrate aligning with the beam 42, the apparatus is capable of “expose a respective circumferential portion of the substrate”).
Claim 14: The optional shield 52 has a rectangular opening or aperture 54 ([0050], 3rd sentence, includes the claimed “wherein the opening has a rectangular shape”, see also Fig. 14).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Alternatively, claims 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over’306, in view of Lou et al. (US 20010009177, hereafter ‘177).
In case Applicants argue that “a first shielding plate, extended from an upper surface of the processing chamber relatively to the plasma generator“ refers to extending point is away relative to the plasma generator, in other words, plasma generator is above the upper surface of the processing chamber.
‘177 is an analogous art in the field of SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR TWO-SIDED ETCH OF A SEMICONDUCTOR SUBSTRATE (title), two cylindrical plasma generation chambers 202a and 202b are arranged side by side (Fig. 2, [0040]), the flow may be controlled by using a gas diverter 228 and/or a flow restricter 230. The diverter 228 allows reactive species to flow across the front side of substrate 224 ([0045], 6th sentence). Fig. 2 of ‘117 shows the diverter 228 is connected to the upper surface of the chamber.
Before the effective filing dates of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to have re-arranged the energetic particles source 50 to plasma generation chamber 202a,b above the chamber of ‘177, attached the shield 54 to the upper surface of the chamber, as taught by ‘117, for its suitability with predictable results. The selection of something based on its known suitability for its intended use has been held to support a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP 2144.07.
Claim 14 rejection is discussed above.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over’306 (optionally with ‘177), as being applied to claim 1 rejection above, further in view of Tani et al. (US 20030085115, hereafter ‘115).
‘306 further teaches that The minor dimension 64 (FIG. 4A) of aperture 54 may be adjusted by moving the members 52a, 52b relative to each other so that the distance between edges 60, 62 changes, as shown in FIG. 3C ([0056], 5th sentence).
‘306 (optionally with ‘177) does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 2: wherein the first shielding plate includes a second shielding plate disposed in the opening and is configured to be driven in a radial direction of the substrate to adjust an opening area of the opening.
‘115 is an analogous art in the field of Thin Film Forming Apparatus (title), correcting the thickness of the thin film by an opening 13a in the first film thickness correcting plate 13 between the substrate 4 and the sputtering cathode 6 corresponding to the distribution of the film thickness measured by the film thickness monitor 10 (abstract), including a plasma source 24 (Fig. 8, [0052], last sentence). ‘115 teaches that the third film thickness correcting plate 16 may be used which can change the opening shape 16a of the opening as shown in FIG. 7 ([0051]), The third film thickness correcting plate 16 has such a structure that shutter splines 181 to 1814 were connected to microcylinders 171 to 1714 each by each, that each of the microcylinders 171 to 1714 might be stretchable using a signal cable 20 extending through the rotating shaft 19, and that the shape of the opening 16a might be arbitrarily variable by moving the splines 181 to 1814 ([0073]), for the purpose of taking care of the circumferential distribution of the film thickness ([0011]).
Before the effective filing dates of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to have added shutter splines 181 to 1814 of ‘115 to the movement member 52a (or 52b or both) of ‘306, as taught by ‘115, for the purpose of taking care of the circumferential distribution of the film thickness, as taught by ‘115 ([0011]) and required by ‘306 ([0056], 5th sentence).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over’306, in view of Tanaka et al. (US 6254718, hereafter ‘718) and ‘115.
‘306 also teaches some limitations of:
Claim 3: Apparatus For Surface Processing Of A Substrate Using An Energetic Particle Beam (title, includes the claimed “A plasma processing apparatus comprising”):
The processing apparatus 40 includes a vacuum chamber 46 that is isolated from the surrounding environment … A sealable port (not shown) is provided in the vacuum chamber 46 for accessing the interior of vacuum chamber 46 to exchange processed substrates 44 for unprocessed substrates 44 (Fig. 3, [0048], includes the claimed “a processing chamber configured to process a substrate having a predetermined film at an outer peripheral portion”);
With continued reference to FIGS. 3 and 3A, the substrate 44 is held and supported by a two-stage fixture 55 having a rotational stage 56 adapted to rotate the substrate 44 in at least one rotational sense about an azimuthal axis 45 of the rotational stage 56 ([0052], includes the claimed “a stage disposed in the processing chamber and on which the substrate is placeable”);
The source 50 of beam 42 is any ion beam source capable of generating energetic particles for performing a thin film deposition, an etching process, a reactive ion etching process, a sputtering process, or other ion beam treatment ([0049], includes the claimed “a plasma generator disposed at an upper portion of the processing chamber and configured to supply plasma to the processing chamber”, note both deposition and etching can be performed);
A shield 52 may be located in an intervening position between the substrate 44 and the source 50 so that the aperture 54 is located in a plane that is substantially parallel to the plane of the substrate 44 ([0050], 2nd sentence), A translation stage 58 of fixture 55, which supports the rotational stage 56, is adapted to move or translate the substrate 44 linearly and bi-directionally (i.e., reversibly) relative to the aperture 54 ([0052], 3rd sentence, is capable of directing ion beam 42 to the peripheral portion of the substrate, includes the claimed “a first shielding plate that: (1) faces the substrate placed on the stage, (ii) has an opening in at least a part of a position overlapping the outer peripheral portion of the substrate in a vertical direction, and (iii) shields the substrate from the plasma at the upper portion of the processing chamber).
‘306 does not teach the other limitations of:
Claim 3: a controller configured to acquire a measurement result relating to a film thickness of the predetermined film, and based on the measurement result, control an actuator configured to move a position of the opening of the first shielding plate relative to a radial direction of the substrate placed on the stage.
‘718 is an analogous art in the field of Combined CMP And Plasma Etching Wafer Flattening System (title). ‘718 also teaches that in the wafer flattening process of the related art, due to the difference in the conditions between the inside portion and the outer peripheral portion of the wafer W, the outer peripheral portion of the wafer W remains as shown in FIG. 19 and the fall in the total thickness value (TTV) of the wafer W becomes a problem (col. 2, lines 3-8).
‘115 is an analogous art as discussed above. ‘115 also teaches that the film thickness monitor 10 is used to measure the thickness of the thin film formed on the substrate 4 ([0044]), When the first to third film thickness correcting plates 13, 14 and 16 are constructed to be movable with external electric signals, then these film thickness correcting plates can be controlled outside the chamber. This eliminates disadvantages from the handling point of view, such as break of a vacuum state inside the chamber ([0051], last two sentences), for the purpose of taking care of the circumferential distribution of the film thickness ([0011]).
Before the effective filing dates of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to have added the film thickness monitor 10 by a controller outside the chamber, as taught by ‘115, for the purpose of taking care of the circumferential distribution of the film thickness, as taught by ‘115 ([0011]), required by ‘306 ([0056], 5th sentence), and solving thickness problem at the outer peripheral portion of the wafer W, as taught by ‘718 (col. 2, lines 3-8).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/10/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In regarding to 35 USC 112(b) rejection of claim 14, see the middle of page 6, Applicants’ amendment overcomes the rejection.
In regarding to 35 USC 103 rejection of claims 1 and 14 over Druz ‘306 and Lou ‘177, Applicants argue that even ‘306 provide a lateral movement, the element 58 only moves the substrate in a single direction, therefore, does not teach “an actuator configured to rotate the substrate and move the substate in a first lateral direction or a second lateral direction, so as to cause a position of the opening of the first shielding plate to expose a respective circumferential portion of the substrate”, see the middle of page 7.
This argument is found not persuasive.
The amended claim requires “move in a first lateral direction or a second lateral direction”. ‘306’ lateral movement clearly reads into this.
Even if Applicants amend the claim to “move in both a first lateral direction and a second lateral direction”, because actuator rotate the substrate, ‘306 is capable of moving a second lateral direction by rotating the substrate 90 degree and then the lateral movement would have been in the second lateral direction and functionally the same.
Because Applicants’ amendment, the examiner notices ‘306 is applicable as a 35 USC 102 rejection reference.
Applicants further assert that claim 3 is allowable because it’s dependency to claim 1, see the last paragraph of page 7.
This argument is found not persuasive.
Claim 3 is independent of claim 1. The previous rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 7033461 is cited for shield plate 42 with rectangular slit 42s (Figs. 3-4B), movable in horizontal direction (col. 7, lines 35-38), and rotatable stage 14 (col. 5, lines 50-53).
The examiner notices that claim 1 is very broad such that various figures US 20210305015 can read into claim 1 by importing commonly knowing rotating support unit.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEATH T CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1870. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-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, 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.
/KEATH T CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights