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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Voronin et al (US 2018/0019102) in view of Valcore, JR et al (US 2017/0084432) and Shimizu et al (US 10,593,518).
For claim 1, Voronin teaches a multi-channel pulse RF power supply apparatus (Figures 2 and 5-6) comprising:
multiple electrodes (216a and 216b, Figure 2) provided in a single chamber (110, as understood by examination of Voronin’s Figure 1);
multiple radio frequency (RF) signal generation units (172 and 130) provided in the same number as the multiple electrodes ([0037] and as understood by examination of Figure 2) to generate RF signals having a predetermined frequency and phase ([0035] and [0045]);
multiple RF signal application units (206a, 206b, 208a, 208b of Figure 2 and 132 and 174 of Figure 1) that connect the multiple RF signal generation units and the multiple electrodes in a one-to-one manner to apply the RF signals to the multiple electrodes, respectively ([0040] and as understood by examination of Figure 2);
multiple impedance matching circuits provided in the multiple RF signal application units, respectively (132 and 174 of Figure 1); and
a multi-output pulse controller (155) provided to be connected to each of the multiple RF signal generation units so as to provide multiple output pulse signals with the same pulse frequency (as understood by [0039], [0045] and Figures 2 and 5), and a pulse width (duty cycle control unit, [0049]) and a pulse delay (phase control unit, [0043]) that are configurable, to the multiple RF signal generation units (as understood by [0041]-[0050] and Figures 2 and 5-6).
Voronin fails to distinctly disclose:
multiple impedance matching circuits provided in the multiple RF signal application units, respectively, to sense reflected waves transmitted from the electrodes and automatically perform impedance matching functions so that the reflected waves become "0"
wherein the multi-output pulse controller comprises an interface unit configured with a touch screen panel capable of inputting control information.
Valcore teaches a host system (180) such as a smart phone or tablet ([0070]) wherein “a decision whether the substrate 119 is to be etched may be provided as an input of a user via an input device of the host system” ([0144]).
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to remotely control operation (e.g., start or stop) of Voronin’s controller 155 since the particular known technique (remote control of plasma processing) was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art.
The combination of Voronin and Valcore fails to teach:
multiple impedance matching circuits provided in the multiple RF signal application units, respectively, to sense reflected waves transmitted from the electrodes and automatically perform impedance matching functions so that the reflected waves become "0"
However, Shimizu teaches using impedance matching circuits (142, 146, 149, Figure 1A) between RF generators (140, 144, and 148, respectively) and electrodes (upper and lower electrode of 110), wherein “…the impedance matching networks 142, 146, 149 may be formed by one or more capacitors and/or an inductor. The values of capacitor may be electronically or mechanically tuned to adjust the matching of each of the impedance matching networks 142, 146, 149.”
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement Voronin’s impedance matching circuits 132 and 174 such that the reflections are substantially zero in order to substantially remove the influence of reflected waves, thereby improving stability.
Furthermore, the particular known technique (tuning an impedance matching circuit) was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, in view of Shimizu. Note that it has been held that discovering an optimum value for a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
The combination of Voronin, Valcore and Shimizu as cited above teaches a multi-channel pulse RF power supply apparatus comprising:
multiple electrodes (216a and 216b, Voronin’s Figure 2) provided in a single chamber (110, as understood by examination of Voronin’s Figure 1);
multiple radio frequency (RF) signal generation units (172 and 130 of Voronin) provided in the same number as the multiple electrodes ([0037] and as understood by examination of Figure 2 of Voronin) to generate RF signals having a predetermined frequency and phase ([0035] and [0045] of Voronin);
multiple RF signal application units (206a, 206b, 208a, 208b of Voronin’s Figure 2 and 132 and 174 of Voronin’s Figure 1) that connect the multiple RF signal generation units and the multiple electrodes in a one-to-one manner to apply the RF signals to the multiple electrodes, respectively ([0040] and as understood by examination of Figure 2 of Voronin);
multiple impedance matching circuits provided in the multiple RF signal application units, respectively (132 and 174 of Voronin’s Figure 1 implemented according to Shimizu), to sense reflected waves transmitted from the electrodes and automatically perform impedance matching functions so that the reflected waves become "0" (as taught by Shimizu, as cited above); and
a multi-output pulse controller (Voronin’s 115 and Valcore’s 180) provided to be connected to each of the multiple RF signal generation units so as to provide multiple output pulse signals with the same pulse frequency (as understood by Voronin’s [0039], [0045] and Figures 2 and 5), and a pulse width (duty cycle control unit, Voronin’s [0049]) and a pulse delay (phase control unit, Voronin’s [0043]) that are configurable, to the multiple RF signal generation units (as understood by Voronin’s [0041]-[0050] and Figures 2 and 5-6).
wherein the multi-output pulse controller comprises an interface unit (Valcore’s 180) configured with a touch screen panel capable of inputting control information (tablet or mobile phone, as cited above).
For claim 2, the combination of Voronin, Valcore and Shimizu as cited above teaches the limitations of claim 2 and Voronin further teaches:
the multi-output pulse controller provides a pulse signal reflecting pulse width (duty cycle control unit, [0049]) and pulse delay settings (phase control unit, [0043]).
For claim 3, the combination of Voronin, Valcore and Shimizu as cited above teaches the limitations of claim 2 and Voronin further teaches the multi-output pulse controller (Figure 4) further comprises:
a multi-output pulse signal generation unit (402, 404, 410 and phase control unit) provided in connection with the interface unit to generate multiple output pulse signals with the same pulse frequency ([0028] and [0045]-[0048]), and a pulse width (410) and a pulse delay (phase control unit, [0043]) that are configurable based on the input control information ([0041]-[0050]); and
a pulse signal output driver (406) provided in connection with the multi-output pulse signal generation unit to transmit the multiple output pulse signals to the multiple RF signal generation units, respectively ([0047]).
For claim 4, the combination of Voronin and Shimizu as cited above teaches the limitations of claim 3 and Voronin further teaches:
the multi-output pulse signal generation unit is configured with a central processing unit (microprocessor, [0031]) and a pulse generation apparatus (404, [0045]).
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 DANIEL CALRISSIAN PUENTES whose telephone number is (571)270-5070. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6:30 (flex).
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, Menatoallah Yousseff can be reached at 571-270-3684. 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.
/DANIEL C PUENTES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2849