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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicants' election, with traverse of Group (Claims 1-8) in the reply, filed on 10/24/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 9-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction requirement in the reply filed on 10/24/2025.
The traversal is on the ground(s) that:
In the present case, although the claimed subject matter may be classified in different classes, Applicant respectfully submits that no unreasonable search and examination burden exists because a search of one would yield results of the other, see page 6.
This argument is found not persuasive.
First, the serious burden was already established by searching in the separated classification of both apparatus claims and method claims as required in the office action, because the mandatory search of the apparatus claims and the mandatory search of the method claims are two completely different searches and thus it doubles the mandatory search and causes a serious burden on the Examiner.
Second, the examiner disagrees with Applicants’ overreaching conclusion that a search of one would yield results of the other. While a search for one group may overlap with a search for another group, there is no factual reason to expect that the searches would yield results of the other.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
(1) The “gas connection that is” of Claim 1 would have a better form if amended to be “gas connection located”, for the purpose of consistency with other similar terms, see the “first connection located” and “second connection located” of claim 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
(1) The “wherein the second purge gas line includes a third purge gas valve configured to open to provide a gas flow path from a purge gas source through the third purge gas line, through the main gas line, and to the waste line” of Claim 7 is not clear, because of the “second purge gas line”.
Does it mean the third purge gas line?
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moriya et al. (US 20090061541, hereafter ‘541) in view of White et al. (US 20100266765, hereafter ‘765) OR Horrii et al. (US 20110008955, hereafter ‘955).
Regarding to Claim 1, ‘541teaches:
Fabrication system (title, the claimed “A processing system”);
reaction tube 112 (Fig. 1 or 12, [0102], the claimed “comprising: a process chamber comprising: a chamber body disposed around a process volume”);
holding unit 114 ([0102], the claimed “a substrate support in the process volume”);
exhaust system 120 for exhausting an inside of the reaction tube 112, a gas supply system 200 for supplying specific gases into the reaction tube 112 ([0102], note the “exhausting” and “supplying” intrinsically teach the tube has inlet and outlet to perform the intended function, the claimed “a gas inlet coupled with the process volume; and an exhaust outlet; and a gas supply system coupled to the gas inlet of the process chamber”);
The gas supply pipe 202 is connected to a lower side of the reaction tube 112 via a main valve 204 ([0104], the claimed “the gas supply system comprising: a main gas line connected with the gas inlet of the process chamber, wherein the main gas line includes a first valve configured to open and provide a gas flow path through the main gas line to the gas inlet of the process chamber”);
The gas supply sources 220A, 220B and 220C are connected, respectively via the gas supply pipes 212A, 212B and 212C, to the gas supply pipe 202 ([0107], the claimed “a first process gas line connected with the main gas line at a first connection located upstream of the first valve; a second process gas line connected with the main gas line at a second connection located upstream of the first valve”);
The gas supply passage 210D of N2 gas used as the purge gas includes a gas supply source 220D of N2 gas ([0111], see also gas pipe 212D, the claimed “and a second purge gas line connected with the main gas line at a second purge gas connection that is upstream of the first valve”).
‘541 does not explicitly teach the other limitations (BOLD and ITALIC letter) of:
Claim 1: a first purge gas line connected with the main gas line at a first purge gas connection that is downstream of the first valve.
‘765 is analogous art in the field of substrate processing (abstract). ‘765 teaches a purge conduit 40 which is in fluid communication with the inert gas feed conduit 18 ([0032], note Fig. 1 shows the conduit 18 is branched into two conduits 20 and 40, and then the portion of the purge conduit 40 between the connection potions 44c and 44a is connected with the source conduit 36 at the connection point 44a that is downstream of the source conduit valve 38 or 54).
OR
‘955 is analogous art in the field of substrate processing (title). ‘955 teaches 214o are connected to the downstream sides of the valves vz3, va3, and vo3 of the first precursor gas supply pipe 213z, the second precursor gas supply pipe 213a, and the ozone gas supply pipe 213o ([0032]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have added additional purge gas line to the purge gas supply passage 210D of ‘541, thus making at least two lines, then have connected the imported line to the gas supply pipe 202 at the purge gas connection located downstream of the valve 204, for the purpose of providing sectional purging, for instance, one for purging only the gas lines 212A-21C and the other for purging only the reaction chamber, thus reducing purging time and material cost, resulting in improving throughput of the manufacturing.
Regarding to Claim 2,
‘541 teaches The bypass line 130 is configured by connecting a bypass pipe 132 ([0105], the claimed “further comprising a waste line connected to the main gas line at a first waste connection that is located upstream of the first valve”).
Regarding to Claim 3,
‘541 teaches a supply-side bypass stop valve 136 is connected to a supply-side (i.e., a side of the gas supply system 200) of the bypass pipe 132 ([0105], note the figures show the valve is connected to the vacuum exhaust unit 124, the claimed “wherein the waste line includes a waste valve configured to open and provide a gas flow path through the waste line to a gas dump”).
Regarding to Claim 4,
As discussed in the claim 1 rejection above, the additional purge gas line is connected to provide purging the reaction chamber. Further, ‘765 teaches A purge valve 42 can be positioned within the purge conduit 40 to selectively allow and block flow of inert carrier gas ([0032]), and ‘955 teaches valve vo4 are respectively installed to control supplies of N2 gas ([0081]). Therefore, the imported purge gas line would have a valve to selectively allow and block flow of the purge gas (the claimed “wherein the first purge gas line includes a first purge gas valve configured to open to provide a gas flow path from a purge gas source through the first purge gas line and to the gas inlet of the process chamber”).
Regarding to Claim 5,
Fig. 12 of ‘541 shows stop valve 230D ([0112], the claimed “wherein the second purge gas line includes a second purge gas valve configured to open to provide a gas flow path from a purge gas source through the second purge gas line, through the main gas line, and to the waste line”).
Regarding to Claim 6,
Fig. 1 of ‘541 shows the purge gas supply passage 210D is branched to three lines each coupled to the valves 262A-262C, therefore, in this case, a right side branched line is a second purge gas line and a left side branched line is a third purge gas line (the claimed “further comprising a third purge gas line connected with the main gas line at a third purge gas connection that is upstream of the second purge gas connection”).
Regarding to Claim 7,
Fig. 1 of ‘541 shows the valve 262C ([0112], the claimed “wherein the second purge gas line includes a third purge gas valve configured to open to provide a gas flow path from a purge gas source through the third purge gas line, through the main gas line, and to the waste line”).
Regarding to Claim 8,
Fig. 1 of ‘541 shows the purge gas connection at the valve 262C is upstream of the first and second process gas connections, which is near the valve 250A-250B (the claimed “wherein the third purge connection is upstream of the first connection for the first process gas line and the second connection for the second process gas line”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AIDEN Y LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1440. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 9am-5pm PT.
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 on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AIDEN LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718