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 .
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.
Claims 1 and 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Diao (CN 105714258 see translation for citations) in view of Hirano (US 2017/0236690).
Regarding claim 1, Diao teaches a plasma processing apparatus comprising:
a chamber (Fig. 2) configured to place a substrate (27) therein, a microwave radiator (24) that is arranged while facing the substrate (35, Fig. 3);
Diao teaches a microwave source configured to output microwaves;
and a distributor (21) having one end connected to the microwave source (Fig. 2) and an other end branched and connected to a microwave radiators (24, dielectric window),
and configured to distribute and transmit the microwaves output from the microwave source to the plurality of microwave radiators, wherein when a wavelength of the microwaves is k, a line length from the one end to the other end falls within a predetermined range beginning from n*lambda/2 (n is a natural number) (see translation, top of pg. 2).
Diao does not explicitly teach a plurality of microwave radiators.
Hirano teaches a plasma processing apparatus comprising:
a chamber 12 configured to place a substrate (W) therein, and including a plurality of microwave radiators (36a, [0044]) that is arranged while facing the substrate (W);
a microwave source (14) configured to output microwaves [0062];
and a distributor (21) having one end connected to the microwave source (Fig. 2) and connected to the plurality of microwave radiators (36a, dielectric window).
Because Hirano teaches using a plurality of radiators for generating a plasma in a plasma processing apparatus is operable it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to have used a plurality of radiators as the radiator of Daio with a reasonable expectation of success. The rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art MPEP 2143.A.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the microwave radiator of Diao by providing a plurality of microwave radiators, as taught by Hirano, because all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art MPEP 2143.A.
Regarding claim 3, Diao teaches the distributor (21) is configured such that the line length falls within n (lambda)/2±8 (top of page 2 of translation) .
Regarding claim 4, Daio teaches the distributor (21) is configured such that a ring-shaped transmission line that transmits the microwaves is formed in a portion of the distributor (21) , and a shortest line length from the one end to the other end falls within a predetermined range beginning from n* (lambda)/2 (see top of page 2 of translation).
Regarding claim 5, Daio teaches the distributor (21) is configured such that the other end is bifurcated one or more times, and is connected to the plurality of microwave radiators (24, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 6, Diao does not teach the distributor is configured with a coaxial line and a strip line.
Hirano teaches the distributor is configured with a coaxial line (16a) and a strip line (16b, [0038}.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the distributor of Diao by providing the distributor is configured with a coaxial line and a strip line, as taught by Hirano, because all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art MPEP 2143.A.
Claims 2, 7, 8, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Diao and Hirano as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of 089’ (JP 3792089).
Regarding claim 2, Daio teaches the distributor is configured such that the line length falls within a range from n* (lambda)/2 (see top of page 2 of translation).
Diao does not teach the microwave source includes a matching box that performs matching with load impedance, in a microwave transmitter that outputs the microwaves.
089’ is directed to a plasma processing apparatus and teaches the microwave source includes a matching box (4a, 4b) that performs matching with load impedance ([0055], fig. 10), in a microwave transmitter (6a, 6b) that outputs the microwaves [0040], the matching box (4a, 4b) being connected to the one end of the distributor (waveguide 3a, 3b, [0040]), and the distributor (3a, 3b) is configured such that the line length falls within a range where impedance is matched by the matching box [0040] [0049] [0051-0052]).
Because ‘089 teaches a matching box connected to a distributor and microwave source is operable in plasma apparatus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to have used the matching box in the apparatus of Diao with a reasonable expectation of success. The rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art MPEP 2143.A.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the microwave source of Diao to provide a matching box that performs matching with load impedance, in a microwave transmitter that outputs the microwaves, the matching box being connected to the one end of the distributor, and the distributor is configured such that the line length falls within a range where impedance is matched by the matching box, as taught by ‘089, all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art MPEP 2143.A.
Regarding claim 7, Diao does not teach the chamber is configured such that the plurality of microwave radiators are provided on a wall surface facing the substrate to surround a position corresponding to a center of the substrate,
the microwave source is provided with a number of microwave transmitters that output the microwaves, the number of which is half or less than half a number of the plurality of microwave radiators,
and a plurality of distributors are provided corresponding to the number of the microwave transmitters, each of the plurality of distributors having one end connected to the microwave transmitter and connecting each of the microwave transmitters to two or more microwave radiators.
‘089 teaches a plasma producing chamber that uses multiple microwave generator sources attached to bifurcated waveguides to compensate for uneven impedances in the plasma chamber allowing for uniform plasma to be created throughout the plasma chamber. It further teaches multiple microwave sources and introduction mechanisms within a single chamber are operable and within reach of one of ordinary skill in the art.
Specifically ‘089 teach the chamber (1, fig. 1) is configured such that the plurality of microwave radiators are provided on a wall surface facing the substrate (8) to surround a position corresponding to a center of the substrate (Fig. 1),
the microwave source is provided with a number of microwave transmitters (6a, 5a, 6b, 5b fig. 3, s1-s2, fig. 12) that output the microwaves, the number of which is half or less than half a number of the plurality of microwave radiators (2a, 2b, Fig. 3; 2a-2d, 12),
and a plurality of distributors (3a, 3b, Fig. 1, 3, 3a-3d, fig. 12) are provided corresponding to the number of the microwave transmitters (6a, 5a, 6b, 5b, Fig. 1 and 3; S1-S4, fig. 12[0049], each of the plurality of distributors (3a, 3b Fig. 1 and 3; 3a-3d, fig. 12) having one end connected to the microwave transmitter (6a, 5a, 6b, 5b, Fig. 3; S1-s4 Fig. 12) and connecting each of the microwave transmitters to two or more microwave radiators (2a, 2b, fig. 3; 2a-2d Fig. 12).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the microwave source of Diao to provide the chamber is configured such that the plurality of microwave radiators are provided on a wall surface facing the substrate to surround a position corresponding to a center of the substrate, the microwave source is provided with a number of microwave transmitters that output the microwaves, the number of which is half or less than half a number of the plurality of microwave radiators, and a plurality of distributors are provided corresponding to the number of the microwave transmitters, each of the plurality of distributors having one end connected to the microwave transmitter and connecting each of the microwave transmitters to two or more microwave radiators, as taught by ‘089, because it would input microwaves with different power to the chamber to provide a uniform plasma in the chamber even when load impedance of the plasma directly under each microwave introduction window is different [0094].
Regarding claim 8, Diao does not teach the chamber is configured such that the plurality of microwave radiators are provided on the wall surface with a plurality of diameters differing from a position corresponding to the center of the substrate
and are spaced apart from each other in a circumferential direction, the number of the microwave transmitters provided for each of the plurality of diameters is half or less than half the number of the plurality of microwave radiators provided in the circumferential direction of the plurality of diameters,
and the plurality of distributors are provided for each of the plurality of diameters with the number of the microwave transmitters of the diameter,
and configured to connect the microwave transmitter of the diameter to two or more microwave radiators adjacent in the circumferential direction of the diameter.
‘089 teaches the chamber is configured such that the plurality of microwave radiators (2a-2d, fig. 11, 12) are provided on the wall surface with a plurality of diameters differing from a position corresponding to the center of the substrate (8, Fig. 1, 12, 17. The Examiner notes that the claim does not require different diameters. The Examiner notes no specific shape is required and takes the position that a diameter is a straight line through the center of an object).
and are spaced apart from each other in a circumferential direction (Fig. 11 and 12, 17), the number of the microwave transmitters (s1-s4, fig. 12 [0049]) provided for each of the plurality of diameters is half or less than half the number of the plurality of microwave radiators (2a-2d) provided in the circumferential direction of the plurality of diameters,
and the plurality of distributors (3a-3d, fig. 12) are provided for each of the plurality of diameters (2a-2d, fig. 11, 12) with the number of the microwave transmitters (s1-s4) of the width, and configured to connect the microwave transmitter ((s1-s4 fig. 12) of the width to two or more microwave radiators (2a-2d) adjacent in the circumferential direction of the diameter.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the chamber of Diao by providing the chamber is configured such that the plurality of microwave radiators are provided on the wall surface with a plurality of diameters differing from a position corresponding to the center of the substrate and are spaced apart from each other in a circumferential direction, the number of the microwave transmitters provided for each of the plurality of diameters is half or less than half the number of the plurality of microwave radiators provided in the circumferential direction of the plurality of diameters, and the plurality of distributors are provided for each of the plurality of diameters with the number of the microwave transmitters of the diameter, and configured to connect the microwave transmitter of the diameter to two or more microwave radiators adjacent in the circumferential direction of the diameter as taught by ‘089, because it would input microwaves with different power to the chamber to provide a uniform plasma in the chamber even when load impedance of the plasma directly under each microwave introduction window is different [0094].
Regarding claim 10, Diao does not teach the requirements of claim 10.
‘089 teaches one microwave transmitter (6a, 5a, 6b, 5b, fig. 3; s1-s4, fig. 12) is provided for each of the plurality of diameters (2a-2d), and one distributor (3a-3d) is provided for each of the plurality of diameters (2a-2d), thereby connecting the microwave transmitter of the diameter to the microwave radiator (2a-2d) of the diameter (Fig. 12). The Examine takes the position that the requirement of “diameter” is used to describe the radiator and isn’t a separate claim element. As with claim 8 all diameters in claim 10 can be the same. Only shapes that can contain a diameter are required.
Because ‘089 teaches a transmitter connected to a distributor connected to a radiator is operable in plasma apparatus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to have used the connection requirements of claim 10 in the apparatus of Diao with a reasonable expectation of success. The rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art MPEP 2143.A.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the apparatus of Diao by providing one microwave transmitter (6a, 5a, 6b, 5b, fig. 3; s1-s4, fig. 12) is provided for each of the plurality of diameters (2a-2d), and one distributor (3a-3d) is provided for each of the plurality of diameters (2a-2d), thereby connecting the microwave transmitter of the diameter to the microwave radiator of the diameter, as taught by ‘089, all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art MPEP 2143.A.
Regarding claim 11, Diao does not teach the requirements of claim 11.
‘089 teaches the chamber (1) is configured such that the wall surface is provided with four microwave radiators (2a, 2b, fig. 3; 2a-2d, fig. 12) for each of a plurality of diameters differing from the position corresponding to the center of the substrate, at equal intervals in the circumferential direction (Fig. 1 and 3, [0038]) because it would provide a uniform plasma within the chamber [0094].
Because ‘089 teaches the positioning of the four microwave radiators is operable and advantageous in a plasma apparatus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to have used the positioning and quantity requirements of claim 11 in the apparatus of Diao with a reasonable expectation of success. The rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art MPEP 2143.A.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the chamber of Diao by providing is configured such that the wall surface is provided with four microwave radiators for each of a plurality of diameters differing from the position corresponding to the center of the substrate, at equal intervals in the circumferential direction, as taught by ‘089, all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art MPEP 2143.A.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Diao and ‘089 as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Fujino (US 2012/0247676).
Regarding claim 9, ‘089 teaches a power of the microwaves output by the microwave transmitter of the diameter [0065].
Neither Daio nor ‘089 explicitly teach a controller configured to control, for each of the plurality of diameters.
Fujino directed to a microwave plasma processing apparatus teaches a controller 81 configured to control the power of the microwaves output by the microwave transmitter [0048].
Because Fujino teaches that a controller configured to control power levels of a microwave generator is operable it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to have used the controller microwaves transmitted to each of the plurality of diameters of Diao in view of ‘089 with a reasonable expectation of success. The rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art MPEP 2143.A.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the controller of the microwaves output by the microwave transmitter of the diameter of Diao by providing a controller configured to control, for each of the plurality of diameters, power of the microwaves output, as taught by Fujino, because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art MPEP 2143. A.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN J BRAYTON whose telephone number is (571)270-3084. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST M-F.
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, James Lin can be reached at 571 272 8902. 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.
JOHN J. BRAYTON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1794
/JOHN J BRAYTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794
Prosecution Insights