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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) were filed on 05/09/2024 and 01/09/2025. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: “44”, “46”, “89”, “118”, and “166” (Figure 1). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: “a polishing liquid 80” (Page 5, Line 7) & “a flexible membrane 144” (Page 5, Lines 23-24). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
“CMP” on Page 1, Line 21 should indicate what the abbreviation stands for prior to use.
“the inner section 418” on Page 12, Line 14 should read “the inner section 318”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 4-6, 11, and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
“the plurality of polishing control parameters” in Claim 2, Lines 2-3 and Claim 11, Lines 2-3 should read “the plurality of control parameters” to keep the language consistent between Claims 1-2 and Claims 10-11.
“the chamber pressure parameters” in Claim 4, Lines 1-2 and Claim 13, Lines 1-2 should read “the plurality of chamber pressure parameters”.
“includes column” in Claim 5, Line 2 and Claim 6, Line 2 should read “includes a column”.
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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 7 discloses the limitations “a first annular flexure” and “a second annular flexure”. However, Claim 7 depends upon Claim 1, and Claim 1 already discloses “an annular flexure”. It is unclear whether the first and second annular flexure of Claim 7 are part of or different from the annular flexure of Claim 1.
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) 10-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xu (US Publication No: 2021/0379721).
Regarding Claim 10: Xu discloses a chemical mechanical polishing apparatus, comprising a platen (Figure 1A, No. 120) to support a polishing pad (110); a carrier head (140) to hold a surface of a substrate (10) against the polishing pad (Figure 1A); a motor (154) to control a lateral position of the carrier head on the polishing pad (paragraph [0037], Lines 1-4); a controller (190) configured to cause the motor to sweep the carrier head across the polishing pad in accord with a sweep profile (Paragraph [0050], Lines 7-10), wherein the controller is configured to select values for a plurality of control parameters to minimize a difference between a target removal profile and an expected removal profile (Paragraph [0047], Lines 4-11; Paragraph [0050], Lines 11-18), the plurality of control parameters including a plurality of dwell time parameters with each respective dwell time parameter of the plurality of dwell time parameters representing an amount of time for the carrier head to spend over a different respective zone on the polishing pad (Paragraph [0049]), wherein a relationship between the plurality of control parameters and a removal rate is stored in a data structure (Paragraphs [0081]-[0082]) representing a first matrix which includes a plurality of columns including a column for each dwell time parameter and a row for each position on the substrate represented in the expected removal profile (Paragraph [0069], Lines 7-15; Paragraph [0070]), and wherein the controller is configured to, as part of selection of the values, calculate the expected removal profile by multiplying the first matrix by a second matrix representing control parameter values (Paragraph [0070]).
Regarding Claim 11: Xu discloses the polishing apparatus of Claim 10, wherein the carrier head comprises a plurality of independently pressurizable chambers (146a-c), and the plurality of control parameters include a plurality of chamber pressure parameters with each respective chamber pressure parameter associated with a respective pressurizable chamber of the plurality of pressurizable chambers (Paragraph [0036], Lines 3-8).
Regarding Claim 12: Xu discloses the polishing apparatus of Claim 11, wherein the plurality of columns of the first matrix includes a column for each chamber pressure parameter (Paragraph [0069], Lines 7-15; Paragraph [0070]).
Regarding Claim 13: Xu discloses the polishing apparatus of Claim 11, wherein values for the plurality of chamber pressure parameters are in units of pressure (Paragraph [0036], Lines 3-8; Paragraph [0062]).
Regarding Claim 14: Xu discloses the polishing apparatus of Claim 11, wherein the controller is configured to apply a minimizing algorithm to reduce a difference between an expected thickness profile and a target thickness profile, wherein applying the minimizing algorithm includes iteratively calculating the expected removal profile using different values for each dwell time parameter (Paragraph [0057]).
Regarding Claim 15: Xu discloses the polishing apparatus of Claim 11, wherein the controller is configured to calculate a sweep profile from values for the plurality of dwell time parameters (Paragraph [0047]).
Regarding Claim 16: Xu discloses the polishing apparatus of Claim 15, wherein the controller is configured to set the sweep profile with a respective speed for each respective annular zone of a plurality of annular zones on the platen (Paragraph [0055]).
Regarding Claim 17: Xu discloses the polishing apparatus of Claim 16, wherein the controller is configured to set the respective speed for each respective annular zone of the plurality of annular zones as a constant value within the respective zone (Paragraph [0055]).
Regarding Claim 18: Xu discloses the polishing apparatus of Claim 17, wherein values for the dwell time parameters are in units of a fraction of total time (Paragraph [0047]).
Regarding Claim 19: Xu discloses the polishing apparatus of Claim 17, wherein the controller is configured to calculate a sweep speed for each respective annular zone of the plurality of annular zones as inversely proportional to the value of the dwell time parameter for the zone (Paragraph [0055]).
Regarding Claim 20: Xu discloses the polishing apparatus of claim 10, wherein the dwell time value for an ith zone from the plurality of annular zones is calculated as T x DTi/2, where T is an oscillation period of the carrier head and DTi is the fractional dwell time value for the ith zone (Paragraph [0049] & [0055]).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gurusamy (US Publication No: 2020/0206866) in view of Xu.
Regarding Claim 1: Gurusamy discloses a chemical mechanical polishing apparatus (Figure 1, No. 20), comprising a platen (24) to support a polishing pad (30), the platen having a central section (26) with an upper surface (24) and an annular flexure (50, 60) surrounding or surrounded by the central section (Figure 1) and having a top surface with a first edge adjacent to and coplanar with the upper surface and a second edge farther from the central section; an actuator (51, 61) arranged to bend the annular flexure so as to modify a vertical position of the second edge of the annular flexure relative to the central section (Paragraph [0037], Lines 5-9); a carrier head (70) to hold a surface of a substrate (10) against the polishing pad; and a motor (21, 76) to generate relative motion between the platen and the carrier head so as to polish an overlying layer on the substrate (Paragraph [0027], Lines 2-3). Gurusamy, however, fails to disclose a controller configured to select values for a plurality of control parameters to minimize a difference between a target removal profile and an expected removal profile, the plurality of control parameters including a first parameter representing a degree of deflection for the flexure, wherein a relationship between the plurality of control parameters and a removal rate is stored in a data structure representing a first matrix which includes a plurality of columns including a column for the degree of deflection of the flexure and a row for each position on the substrate represented in the expected removal profile, and wherein the controller is configured to, as part of selection of the values, calculate the expected removal profile by multiplying the first matrix by a second matrix representing control parameter values.
Xu teaches a chemical mechanical polishing apparatus, comprising a platen (Figure 1A, No. 120) to support a polishing pad (110), the apparatus comprises a controller (190) configured to select values for a plurality of control parameters to minimize a difference between a target removal profile and an expected removal profile (Paragraph [0047], Lines 4-11; Paragraph [0050], Lines 11-18), the plurality of control parameters including a first parameter representing a degree of deflection for the flexure (Paragraph [0049]), wherein a relationship between the plurality of control parameters and a removal rate is stored in a data structure (Paragraph [0081]-[0082]) representing a first matrix which includes a plurality of columns including a column for the degree of deflection of the flexure and a row for each position on the substrate represented in the expected removal profile (Paragraph [0069], Lines 7-15; Paragraph [0070], and wherein the controller is configured to, as part of selection of the values, calculate the expected removal profile by multiplying the first matrix by a second matrix representing control parameter values (Paragraph [0070]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the chemical mechanical polishing apparatus of Gurusamy with a controller, as taught by Xu, for the purpose of generating an estimated measure of the thickness of the layer being polished and thus measuring polishing progress (Paragraph [0048], Lines 4-9; Paragraph [0049], Lines 1-3).
Regarding Claim 2: Gurusamy, in view of Xu, discloses the polishing apparatus of Claim 1, wherein the carrier head comprises a plurality of independently pressurizable chambers (Xu: 146a-c), and the plurality of control parameters include a plurality of chamber pressure parameters with each respective chamber pressure parameter associated with a respective pressurizable chamber of the plurality of pressurizable chambers (Paragraph [0036], Lines 3-8).
Regarding Claim 3: Gurusamy, in view of Xu, discloses the polishing apparatus of Claim 2, wherein the plurality of columns of the first matrix includes a column for each chamber pressure parameter (Xu: Paragraph [0069], Lines 7-15; Paragraph [0070]).
Regarding Claim 4: Gurusamy, in view of Xu, discloses the polishing apparatus of Claim 2, wherein values for the plurality of chamber pressure parameters are in units of pressure (Xu: Paragraph [0036], Lines 3-8; Paragraph [0062]).
Regarding Claim 5: Gurusamy, in view of Xu, discloses the polishing apparatus of Claim 1, wherein the platen includes the annular flexure surrounding the central section (Gurusamy: Figure 1), and the first matrix includes a column for the degree of deflection of the flexure surrounding the central section (Xu: Paragraph [0069], Lines 7-15; Paragraph [0070]).
Regarding Claim 6: Gurusamy, in view of Xu, discloses the polishing apparatus of Claim 1, wherein the platen includes the annular flexure surrounded by the central section (Gurusamy: Figure 1), and the first matrix includes a column for the degree of deflection of the flexure surrounded by the central section (Xu: Paragraph [0069], Lines 7-15; Paragraph [0070]).
Regarding Claim 7: Gurusamy, in view of Xu, discloses the polishing apparatus of Claim 1, wherein the platen includes a first annular flexure (50) surrounding the central section and a second annular flexure (60) surrounded by the central section (Figure 1), and the first matrix includes a first column for the degree of deflection of the first flexure and a second column for the degree of deflection of the second flexure (Xu: Paragraph [0069], Lines 7-15; Paragraph [0070]).
Regarding Claim 8: Gurusamy, in view of Xu, discloses the polishing apparatus of Claim 1, wherein the degree of deflection of the flexure is in units of distance (Xu: Paragraph [0047]).
Regarding Claim 9: Gurusamy, in view of Xu, discloses the polishing apparatus of Claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to apply a minimizing algorithm to reduce a difference between an expected thickness profile and a target thickness profile, wherein applying the minimizing algorithm includes iteratively calculating the expected removal profile using different values for the degree of deflection of the flexure (Xu: Paragraph [0057]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL L SEHN whose telephone number is (571)270-3564. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 AM-6 PM, every other Friday off.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Courtney Heinle can be reached at 571-270-3508. 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.
/MICHAEL L SEHN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights