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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of species I, Figures 1-8, claims “1-14, 16-21, and 24-36” in the reply filed on July 13, 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). The Examiner disagrees on the grouping of claims for the elected species of Figures 1-8. In particular, claims 4-6, 17-19, and 24-36 all require, or depend from, a claim reciting “injection zones” as supported only by Applicant’s 125A-C; Figure 23. Figure 23 is not the elected species of Figures 1-8. Claims 4-6, 18, and 24-36 and thus withdrawn from examination as drawn to a non-elected species.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “center gas flow port” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
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 16 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 16 recites the limitation “susceptor heating assembly”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 1-3, 7-8, 10, 20, 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schwambera, Markus et al. (US 20040231599 A1). Schwambera teaches a multi-wafer metal organic chemical vapor deposition system (Figure 3) in which adjacent wafers (“substrate”; throughout) positioned within the system (Figure 3) rotate ([0012]) about their own axes, the system (Figure 3) comprising:a reaction chamber (1; Figure 3; [0011]) having an exhaust system and a ceiling; a multi-wafer carrier (3; Figure 3; [0013]) including a wafer carrier body (3; Figure 3; [0013]) and a plurality of wafer carrier discs (2; Figure 3; [0013]) supported within the wafer carrier body (3; Figure 3; [0013]); a ceiling heater assembly (13; Figure 3; [0016]; “...chamber cover can ..be heated..”; [0004]) disposed along the ceiling above the multi-wafer carrier (3; Figure 3; [0013]) for heating the ceiling of the reaction chamber (1; Figure 3; [0011]); a ceiling injector (5,6; Figure 3) positioned along the ceiling over the multi-wafer carrier (3; Figure 3; [0013]) for injecting gas into the reaction chamber (1; Figure 3; [0011]); a center gas flow port (piping for 17,19,20; Figure 3-not shown by Applicant’s. Assumed to be “central injector 102”; Figure 1) positioned in a center of the multi-wafer carrier (3; Figure 3; [0013]); and a susceptor heater (8; Figure 3; [0016]) assembly positioned beneath the multi-wafer carrier (3; Figure 3; [0013]).
Schwambera further teaches:
The multi-wafer metal organic chemical vapor deposition system (Figure 3) of claim 1, wherein the multi-wafer carrier body (3; Figure 3; [0013]) is configured to rotate ([0012]), as claimed by claim 2
The multi-wafer metal organic chemical vapor deposition system (Figure 3) of claim 1, wherein the center gas flow port (piping for 17,19,20; Figure 3-not shown by Applicant’s. Assumed to be “central injector 102”; Figure 1) comprise a movable ([0012]) center gas flow port (piping for 17,19,20; Figure 3-not shown by Applicant’s. Assumed to be “central injector 102”; Figure 1) that comprises a reactant gas inlet port (piping for 17,19,20; Figure 3) with at least one injection zone, as claimed by claim 3. The above, and below, italicized text is considered an intended use claim requirement in the pending apparatus claims. Further, it has been held that claim language that simply specifies an intended use or field of use for the invention generally will not limit the scope of a claim (Walter , 618 F.2d at 769, 205 USPQ at 409; MPEP 2106). Additionally, in apparatus claims, intended use must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim (In re Casey,152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto , 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); MPEP2115).
The multi-wafer metal organic chemical vapor deposition system (Figure 3) of claim 1, wherein the ceiling injector (5,6; Figure 3) includes a top ceiling plate (5; Figure 3-Applicant’s 300; Figure 1) and a lower ceiling plate (6; Figure 3-Applicant’s 310; Figure 1) spaced from the top ceiling plate (5; Figure 3-Applicant’s 300; Figure 1) with an open space (14,15) formed therein, the lower ceiling plate (6; Figure 3-Applicant’s 310; Figure 1) has showerhead holes (14,15; Figure 3) formed therethrough for injecting the gas into the reaction chamber (1; Figure 3; [0011]), as claimed by claim 7
The multi-wafer metal organic chemical vapor deposition system (Figure 3) of claim 7, wherein the ceiling heater assembly (13; Figure 3; [0016]; “...chamber cover can ..be heated..”; [0004]) is disposed above the ceiling injector (5,6; Figure 3) with a barrier (5; Figure 3) disposed therebetween to prevent the gas from the reaction chamber (1; Figure 3; [0011]) from flowing into the ceiling heater assembly (13; Figure 3; [0016]; “...chamber cover can ..be heated..”; [0004]), as claimed by claim 8
The multi-wafer metal organic chemical vapor deposition system (Figure 3) of claim 1, wherein the ceiling heater assembly (13; Figure 3; [0016]; “...chamber cover can ..be heated..”; [0004]) operates at a first temperature that is different than a second temperature at which the susceptor heater (8; Figure 3; [0016]) assembly operates to permit a temperature gradient between the ceiling and the wafer-carrier body (3; Figure 3; [0013]) to be reduced to suppress convection by temperature gradient towards the ceiling, as claimed by claim 10.
The multi-wafer metal organic chemical vapor deposition system (Figure 3) of claim 1, wherein the gas injected by the ceiling injector (5,6; Figure 3) comprises a carrier (3; Figure 3; [0013]) gas and/or an etching gas, as claimed by claim 20
The multi-wafer metal organic chemical vapor deposition system (Figure 3) of claim 20, wherein the carrier (3; Figure 3; [0013]) gas comprises H2, N2, Ar, or a combination thereof and the etching gas comprises HCL, C12, or TBCl, as claimed by claim 21
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Schwambera, Markus et al. (US 20040231599 A1) in view of, if necessary, Burk, Jr.; Albert A. (US 5788777 A). Schwambera is discussed above. Although Schwambera does not explicitly detail how Schwambera’s gases are exhausted from Schwambera’s vapor deposition system (Figure 3), it is believed, under anticipation that Schwambera teaches Schwambera’s multi-wafer metal organic chemical vapor deposition system (Figure 3) of claim 1, wherein the exhaust system (not shown; required) comprises a peripheral exhaust (not shown; required for operation) located radially outward from each of the multi- wafer carrier (3; Figure 3; [0013]), the ceiling heater assembly (13; Figure 3; [0016]; “...chamber cover can ..be heated..”; [0004]), and the susceptor heating assembly (8; Figure 3; [0016]-assumed “susceptor heater assembly”), as claimed by claim 16.
If Schwambera is deemed as not teaching any means, shown or not, for Schwambera to exhaust Schwambera’s waste gas then Burk also teaches a similar film growth vapor deposition system (Figure 1) including an exhaust system (50; Figure 1) comprises a peripheral exhaust (50; Figure 1) located radially outward from each of Burk’s multi- wafer carrier (20; Figure 1), and Burk’s susceptor heating assembly (28; Figure 1) - claim 16.
In the event that the Examiner’s grounds of anticipation are not accepted then, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Schwambera to add Burk’s exhaust system (50; Figure 1).
Motivation for Schwambera to add Burk’s exhaust system (50; Figure 1) is for exhausting Schwambera’s waste gases as taught by Burk.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 9 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwambera, Markus et al. (US 20040231599 A1) in view of Kappeler; Johannes et al. (US 20100273320 A1). Schwambera is discussed above. Schwambera does not teach:
Schwambera’s multi-wafer metal organic chemical vapor deposition system (Figure 3) of claim 1, wherein Schwambera’s ceiling heater assembly (13; Figure 3; [0016]; “...chamber cover can ..be heated..”; [0004]) comprises a water-cooled RF coil, as claimed by claim 9
Schwambera’s multi-wafer metal organic chemical vapor deposition system (Figure 3) of claim 1, wherein Schwambera’s susceptor heater (8; Figure 3; [0016]) assembly comprises a water-cooled RF coil, as claimed by claim 14
Kappeler also teaches a multi-wafer vapor deposition system (Figure 1) including ceiling heater assembly (12,13; Figure 1) and susceptor heater (12,11; Figure 1) comprises a water-cooled RF coil ([0025], [0027]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Schwambera to add Kappeler’s ceiling heater assembly (12,13; Figure 1) and replace Schwambera’s susceptor heater (8; Figure 3; [0016]).
Motivation for Schwambera to add Kappeler’s ceiling heater assembly (12,13; Figure 1) and replace Schwambera’s susceptor heater (8; Figure 3; [0016]) is for process chamber temperature control as taught by Kappeler ([0030]).
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwambera, Markus et al. (US 20040231599 A1) in view of Jurgensen, Holger et al. (US 20040003779 A1). Schwambera is discussed above. Schwambera does not teach:
The multi-wafer metal organic chemical vapor deposition system (Figure 3) of claim 10, wherein the first temperature is greater than the second temperature, as claimed by claim 11
The multi-wafer metal organic chemical vapor deposition system (Figure 3) of claim 11, wherein the first temperature is between 600°C and 1200°C and the second temperature is between 600°C to 900°C, as claimed by claim 12
Jurgensen also teaches a multi-wafer chemical vapor deposition system (Figure 1) including above and below separately powered and separate temperature-controlled coils (19,20; Figure 1; [0010]) up to 1800ºC ([0010]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Schwambera to add Jurgensen’s temperature-controlled coils (19,20; Figure 1; [0010]).
Motivation for Schwambera to add Jurgensen’s temperature-controlled coils (19,20; Figure 1; [0010]) is for process temperature management as taught by Jurgensen ([0004], [0009]).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwambera, Markus et al. (US 20040231599 A1) in view of Doering; Kenneth Brian et al. (US 20210092800 A1). Schwambera is discussed above. Schwambera does not teach Schwambera’s multi-wafer metal organic chemical vapor deposition system (Figure 3) of claim 1, wherein Schwambera’s susceptor heater (8; Figure 3; [0016]) assembly comprises a split heater coil defined by an outer coil and an inner coil that is operatively coupled to the outer coil.
Doering also teaches a multi-wafer vapor deposition system (Figure 1) including susceptor heater (300; Figure 1; [0051]-[0052]) assembly comprises a split heater coil (310a-c; Figure 1) defined by an outer coil (310c; Figure 1) and an inner coil (310a; Figure 1) that is operatively coupled to the outer coil (310c; Figure 1) operated independently in zone heating ([0051]-[0052]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Schwambera replace Schwambera’s susceptor heater (8; Figure 3; [0016]) with Doering’s susceptor heater (300; Figure 1; [0051]-[0052]).
Motivation for Schwambera replace Schwambera’s susceptor heater (8; Figure 3; [0016]) with Doering’s susceptor heater (300; Figure 1; [0051]-[0052]) is for “…, three separate control zones can provide the ability to manage uniform wafer temperature to less than one degree.” as taught by Doering ([0058]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Film deposition chambers with rotating susceptors and similar gas introduction means include US 20100273320 A1; US 8841221 B2; US 20080308040 A1; US 7332038 B2
US 8679254 B2; US 8927302 B2; US 20110180001 A1; US 20100307418 A1; US 5074017 A; US 3845738 A; US 20040129215 A1; US 20040231599 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Rudy Zervigon whose telephone number is (571) 272- 1442. The examiner can normally be reached on a Monday through Thursday schedule from 8am through 6pm EST. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Any Inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the Chemical and Materials Engineering art unit receptionist at (571) 272-1700. If the examiner cannot be reached please contact the examiner's supervisor, Parviz Hassanzadeh, at (571) 272- 1435.
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:/Awww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
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.
/Rudy Zervigon/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights