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
Response to Amendment
Applicants' amendment of the claims, filed on 07/10/2026, in response to the rejection of claims 1-8 from the non-final office action, mailed on 01/12/2026, by amending claims 1, 7, is acknowledged and will be addressed below.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 9-20 remain withdrawn from consideration as pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
(1) The “is downstream the first process gas line” of Claim 1 would have a better form if amended to be “is downstream of the first process gas line”, for the purpose of consistency with other similar terms, see the “downstream of” and “upstream of” as recited in the claim 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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 Park et al. (US 20050223982, hereafter ‘982) OR Park (US 20020007790, hereafter ‘790).
Regarding Claim 1, ‘541 teaches:
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 located 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 located downstream of the first valve, and a second purge gas line connected with the main gas line at a second purge gas connection located upstream of the first valve, wherein the second purge gas connection is downstream the first process gas line and the second process gas line.
‘982 is analogous art in the field of substrate processing (abstract). Fig. 1 of ‘982 (or see the first illustration below, which is reproduced from Fig. 1 of ‘982) shows a first purge gas line at a first purge gas connection located downstream of the valve, and further shows a second purge gas line at a second purge gas connection located upstream of the valve and downstream of the process gas line (note see also [0049] disclosing “the inert gas flows through the second valve V2 and the fourth valve V4 and is fed through the first reactive gas transfer line 320 into the reaction chamber 100”, and [0068] disclosing “by opening the tenth valve V10 and the eleventh valve V11, a main purge gas (e.g., inert gas), flow-rate-controlled by the MFC 4, can flow through the reactive gas transfer line 320 into the reaction chamber 100”. Further note same configuration also can be defined around the line 350 of Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
462
884
media_image1.png
Greyscale
OR
‘790 is analogous art in the field of substrate processing (abstract). ‘790 teaches The gas jungle further includes a separate inert gas supply line 320 for supplying an inert gas from the inert gas supply source 310 in order to purge gases and/or contaminating sources remaining in the lines ([0055], note Fig. 1 of ‘790 or the second illustration below, which is reproduced from Fig. 1 of ‘790 shows a first purge gas line at a first purge gas connection located downstream of the valve, and further shows a second purge gas line at a second purge gas connection located upstream of the valve and downstream of the process gas line. Further note same configuration also can be defined around the valve V5 of Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
636
889
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 branched additional purge gas lines from the purge gas supply passage 212D of ‘541, then to have connected the branched gas line with the gas supply pipe 202 at the purge gas connections located both upstream and downstream of the valve 204, see the third and fourth illustrations below (which are reproduced from Figs. 1 and 12 of ‘541), for the purpose of providing sectional purging, for instance, for purging only the gas lines from the valve 250A-250C to the valve 204 through the bypass line 130, and also for purging only the reaction chamber from the gas inlet valve 204, thus reducing purging time and material cost, resulting in improving throughput of the manufacturing. In this case, the second purge gas line at the second purge connection is differently defined, as shown in the third and fourth illustrations below.
PNG
media_image3.png
1128
756
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding 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 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 Claims 4-5,
Fig. 1 of ‘982 and Fig. 1 of 790 (or the first and second illustrious above) clearly show each of the first and second purge gas lines includes a valve configured to provide a gas flow path from a purge gas source. Therefore, as discussed in the claim 1 rejection above, each of the branched purge gas lines 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” of Claim 4, and “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” of Claim 5).
Regarding Claim 6,
Fig. 12 of ‘541 clearly shows a third purge gas line at a third purge gas connection on the main gas line, see also the fourth illustration above. Further, ‘790 clearly teaches the gas jungle ([0055], note Fig. 1 of ‘790 clearly shows the gas line in the gas jungle can be branched to any number at any position, depending on a desired application, thus Fig. 1 of ‘541 also can have additional branched lines, see the third and fourth illustrations above, 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 Claim 7,
As discussed in the claim 5 rejection above, the third purge gas line also would have a valve to selectively allow and block flow of the purge gas (the claimed and “wherein the third 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 Claim 8,
Fig. 12 of ‘541 (or the third and fourth illustrious above) shows the third purge gas connection is upstream of the first and second process gas lines 212A-212C (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”).
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed on 07/10/2026 have been fully considered but they are not convincing in light of the new ground of rejection above. Further, the examiner emphasizes the location and the number of the purge line are merely determined by needs depending on desired applications, for instance, for sectional purging on the gas lines, this feature is commonly-well known in the art, therefore, the feature would have not a patentable weight.
Conclusion
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 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
Prosecution Insights