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 .
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.
Claims 1-17 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "a top surface" in line 9 is same or different than top surface of line 2. For examination purposes, it is considered as same and is being considered as -- the top surface --.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galburt et al. (US 9337014 B1) in view of Lee et al. (US 2009/0211742 A1) and Kraus et al. (US 2002/0005168 A1).
In regards to claim 1, Galburt discloses a cooling apparatus (substrate processing system) comprising: a cooling plate (a cold plate 39) comprising a top surface (upper surface 63 of the cold plate 39); and one or more open recesses (corresponding to openings 67; Fig. 9) disposed in a top surface (63) of the cooling plate (39) extending inward from a perimeter of the cooling plate (39) toward a center point of the cooling plate (39), the open recesses (67) disposed opposite sides of the cooling plate wherein the open recesses (67) are sized to receive a corresponding substrate handling member (processed 151 and unprocessed carrier 152) of an indexer (corresponding to wafer or quartz carrier 15).
Galburt fails to explicitly teach the top surface of the cool plate including an array of embedded substrate support members protruding therefrom; a channel disposed in an underside portion of the cooling plate; a conduit embedded in the channel, the conduit comprising a coolant inlet at a first end and a coolant outlet at a second end; a viscous thermally conductive material disposed in the channel and thermally coupled to an interior surface of the channel and an exterior surface of the conduit; the cooling plate being circumferential.
Lee discloses a cooling apparatus (thermal processing apparatus 100) comprising: a cooling plate (210) comprising a top surface including an array of embedded substrate support members (a plurality of balls 305 and pins 308) protruding therefrom; a channel (420) disposed in an underside portion (corresponding to base 410) of the cooling plate (210); a conduit (a cooling tube) embedded in the channel (tube or pipe to fit within the channel or base; pars. 31 and 33), the conduit comprising a coolant inlet (cooling fluid inlet 405 a) at a first end and a coolant outlet (cooling fluid outlet 405 b) at a second end (Fig. 4A). Lee further teaches that cooling plate (210 a-b of Lee; Figs 2-3) is circumferential.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Galburt such that the top surface of the cool plate including an array of embedded substrate support members protruding therefrom; a channel disposed in an underside portion of the cooling plate; a conduit embedded in the channel, the conduit comprising a coolant inlet at a first end and a coolant outlet at a second end as taught by Lee in order to transmitting cooling fluid and increased convective surface area and a plurality of oxide balls positioned to conduct heat away from the wafer (refer to par. 19 of Lee).
In view of Lee’s teachings, it would also have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to change the shape of the cooling plate to form a circumferential plate since a change in shape is generally recognized at being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F. 2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Kraus further teaches a thermally conductive mixture wherein a viscous thermally conductive material (brazed or adhered using a conductive adhesive; par. 39) disposed in the channel (lower surface 288 of spiral pattern) and thermally coupled to an interior surface of the channel (spiral pattern against the lower surface 288) and an exterior surface of the conduit (tube 290), (refer to par. 39).
It would further have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Galburt such that a viscous thermally conductive material disposed in the channel and thermally coupled to an interior surface of the channel and an exterior surface of the conduit as taught by Kraus in order to promote uniformity of heat transfer across the width of the platen (refer to par. 39 of Kraus).
In regards to claim 2, Galburt as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Lee teaches wherein the array of embedded substrate support members (a plurality of balls 305) comprise a plurality of standoff spheres (spherical balls; par. 28) each partially embedded in a corresponding cavity (holes 435) in the top surface of the cooling plate (210a), but fails to explicitly teach wherein the standoff spheres protrude above the top surface of the cooling plate by about 0.3 mm.
Lee does however teach a plurality of balls 305 located on the surface of cooling plate 210. When the thermally processed substrate is placed on top of the balls 305 by the transfer robot, balls 305 support the processed substrate, such that the processed substrate is separated from the surface of cooling plate 210. Balls 305 can be used to desirably transmit the heat from the thermally processed substrate to cooling plate 210 (par. 28). Therefore, the distance from the standoff spheres protrude above the top surface of the cooling plate is recognized as result-effective variables, i.e. a variable which achieves a recognized result. In this case, the recognized result is the transmission of the heat from the thermally processed substrate to cooling plate 210 (par. 28). Therefore, since the general conditions of the claim, i.e. the standoff spheres protrude above the top surface of the cooling plate by unknown height and design factors involved, were disclosed in the prior art by Lee, it is not inventive to discover the optimum workable range or value by routine experimentation, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to modify Galburt, by setting the distance of the standoff spheres protrude above the top surface of the cooling plate by about 0.3 mm.
Claims 3-5 are rejected under pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galburt et al. (US 9337014 B1) in view of LEE et al. (US 2009/0211742 A1) and Kraus et al. (US 2002/0005168 A1), further in view of Roy (US 2010/0247804).
In regards to claim 3, Galburt as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 2. Further, Lee teaches wherein the standoff spheres comprise silicon nitride, quartz or ceramic, or a combination thereof (refer to pars. 28 and 39), but fails to explicitly teach further comprising a vented screw mated into a threaded hole adjacent to one of the pluralities of standoff spheres.
Roy teaches further comprising a vented screw (mounting bolt 214a) mated into a threaded hole adjacent to one of the pluralities of standoff spheres (corresponding to a series of lift pin entry points 216).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Galburt such that a vented screw mated into a threaded hole adjacent to one of the pluralities of standoff spheres as taught by Roy in order to provide a portal through which cooling gas can escape from the gas channels (refer to par. 23 of Roy).
In regards to claim 4, Galburt as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the top surface includes a segmented raised boundary disposed circumferentially about a perimeter of the cooling plate. Roy teaches wherein the top surface includes a segmented raised boundary (corresponding to an outer edge 212) disposed circumferentially about a perimeter of the cooling plate (substrate support platform 202).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Galburt such that the top surface includes a segmented raised boundary disposed circumferentially about a perimeter of the cooling plate as taught by Roy in order for gas flowing along the radial gas channels disperses into the chamber atmosphere upon exiting the radial gas channels at the outer edge (refer to par. 22 of Roy).
In regards to claim 5, Galburt as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach further comprising an array of venting channels patterned into the top surface. Roy teaches further comprising an array of venting channels (gas channels 206, 208, and 210) patterned into the top surface (par. 24; Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Galburt such that an array of venting channels patterned into the top surface as taught by Roy in order to encourage heat transfer while allowing the substrate to remain substantially within a single position without the aid of a mechanical or electrical mechanism for clamping the substrate in place (refer to par. 25 of Roy).
Claims 6-7 and 11-17 are rejected under pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galburt et al. (US 9337014 B1) in view of LEE et al. (US 2009/0211742 A1) and Kraus et al. (US 2002/0005168 A1), further in view of Rivkin et al. (US 6270582).
In regards to claim 6, Galburt discloses a cooling plate arrangement (Fig. 9), comprising: a cooling plate (cold plate 39) as recited in claim 1, wherein the indexer (15) further comprises: an actuator assembly (a vertical motion mechanism 35) configured to translate along a vertical axis (vertical motion) to a first position (lower position) and a second position (upper position); but fails to explicitly teach a crossbeam cantilevered and extending from the actuator assembly along a horizontal axis with respect to the actuator assembly, wherein the indexer is radially offset from the cooling plate. Rivkin teaches a crossbeam (a tie bar 146) cantilevered and extending from the actuator assembly (lift actuator 148) along a horizontal axis with respect to the actuator assembly (148), wherein the indexer is radially offset from the cooling plate (as can be seen in Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Galburt such that a crossbeam cantilevered and extending from the actuator assembly along a horizontal axis with respect to the actuator assembly, wherein the indexer is radially offset from the cooling plate as taught by Rivkin to be more productive, reduces the time required for an individual wafer to be processed and decreases the amount of space required for the manufacturing facility (refer to col.3, lines 30-35 of Rivkin).
In regards to claim 7, Galburt as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 6. Further, Rivkin teaches further comprising a plurality of substrate handling members (wafer seats 140, 142) coupled to the crossbeam (a tie bar 146) and arranged in pairs at opposing ends of the crossbeam (as can be seen in Fig. 3), wherein a first set of opposing pairs (lower wafer seats 140) of substrate handling members (140/142) is disposed to circumferentially support a first substrate (lower wafer) and a second set of opposing pairs (upper wafer seats 142) of substrate handling members is disposed to circumferentially support a second substrate (upper wafer), wherein the first set is disposed lower than the second set (as can be seen in Fig. 3) and wherein corresponding ones of the substrate handling members of the first set are sized to engage with respective ones of the one or more open recesses (corresponding to opening 158).
In regards to claim 11, Galburt as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 7. Further, Galburt teaches a substrate processing system (Fig. 3) wherein a substrate transfer system (a transport system or transfer assembly 31), comprising: the cooling plate (a cold plate 39) arrangement as recited in claim 7; a substrate transfer chamber (three-level load lock chamber 11) including a housing (chamber enclosure 45) to enclose the cooling plate (39) and the indexer (corresponding to wafer or quartz carrier 15), wherein the indexer (15) comprises a lower substrate transfer arrangement (a lower stage 33B) including the first opposing pair and an upper substrate transfer arrangement (an upper stage 33A) including the second opposing pair; and a controller (a system controller 23) disposed in communication with and operatively connected to the indexer (15), the controller (23) responsive to instructions recorded on a non-transitory machine-readable memory to lower the indexer (via a vertical motion mechanism 35) to the first position (an upper position) to mate the first opposing vertical pair within the open recesses (67; Fig. 9) or to raise the indexer (15) to the second position (a lower position) removing the first opposing pair from within the open recesses (67), or a combination thereof.
In regards to claim 12, Galburt as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 11. Further, Galburt teaches a substrate processing system (Fig. 3) wherein the controller (23) is further in communication and operatively connected with a first gate valve (external door 30) coupled to the housing (chamber enclosure 45) and a second gate valve (internal door 32) coupled to the housing (45) and wherein the instructions further cause the controller (23) to simultaneously close the first gate valve (30) and raise the indexer (15) to the second position (a lower position).
In regards to claim 13, Galburt as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 12. Further, Galburt teaches wherein the instructions further cause the controller (23) to simultaneously open the first gate valve (30) and close the second gate valve (32), (as can be seen in Fig. 3A).
In regards to claim 14, Galburt as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 11. Further, Galburt teaches wherein the controller (23) is further in communication and operatively connected with a first gate valve (external door 30) coupled to the housing (45), a second gate valve (internal door 32) coupled to the housing (45), a first transfer arm (151) disposed adjacent (near) to the first gate valve (30) and a second transfer arm (152) disposed adjacent (near) to the second gate valve (32) and wherein the instructions further cause the controller (23) to:
a) move the indexer (15) to the first position (lower position);
b) open the first gate valve (30);
c) extend the first transfer arm (151) to insert an unprocessed substrate through the open first gate valve (30) and position the unprocessed substrate on an upper substrate transfer arrangement (an upper stage 33A);
d) move the indexer (15) to a second position (upper position);
e) close the first gate valve (30);
f) open the second gate valve (32);
g) extend the second transfer arm to insert a processed substrate through the open second gate valve (32) and position the processed substrate on the lower substrate transfer arrangement (33B);
h) move the indexer (15) to the first position (lower position);
i) extend the second transfer arm (152) through the open second gate valve (32) to remove the unprocessed substrate from the upper substrate transfer arrangement (33A);
j) close the second gate valve (32);
k) open first gate valve (30);
l) extend the first substrate transfer arm (151) through the open first gate valve (30) to insert a second unprocessed substrate (repeating steps) through the open first gate valve (30) and position the second unprocessed substrate on the upper substrate transfer arrangement (33A);
m) move indexer (15) to the second position (upper position); and
n) remove the processed substrate from the lower substrate transfer arrangement (33B) through open first gate valve (30).
In regards to claim 15, Galburt as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 14. Further, Galburt teaches wherein the instructions further cause the controller (23) to perform actions a-n sequentially (a sequence of operations in the load lock and choreography of wafer movement within the processing system is as follows with reference to FIGS. 3A-3G; col.5, lines 48-50).
In regards to claim 16, Galburt as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 14. Further, Galburt teaches wherein the instructions further cause the controller (13) to proceed from action e upon completing action n (FIGS. 3A-3G; col.5, lines 48-50).
In regards to claim 17, Galburt as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 14. Further, Galburt teaches wherein the instructions further cause the controller (23) to perform actions d-e-f or j-k simultaneously, or a combination thereof (as shown in Fig. 3G; col.6, lines 2-8).
Claims 18-20 are rejected under pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galburt et al. (US 9337014 B1) in view of Rivkin et al. (US 6270582).
In regards to claim 18, Galburt discloses a substrate transfer method (method of transport system or transfer assembly 31), comprising: at a chamber arrangement including a transfer chamber (process chamber 13) opening to a first gate valve (external door 30) and a second gate valve (internal door 30); a cooling plate (a cold plate 39) comprising a top surface (upper surface 63 of the cold plate 39) having one or more open recesses (corresponding to openings 67; Fig. 9) extending inward from a perimeter of the cooling plate (39) toward a center point of the cooling plate (39); an indexer (corresponding to wafer or quartz carrier 15) offset from the cooling plate (39) comprising an actuator assembly (a vertical motion mechanism 35) configured to translate along a vertical axis (vertical drive) to a first position (lower position) and a second position (upper position); and a plurality of substrate handling members (processed 151 and unprocessed carrier 152);
a) moving the indexer (15) to a first position (lower position) and coupling the plurality of substrate handling members (151/152) into corresponding open recesses (67);
b) opening the first gate valve (30);
c) inserting an unprocessed substrate through the open first gate valve (as can be seen in Fig. 3A) and positioning the unprocessed substrate on an upper substrate transfer arrangement (an upper stage 33A);
d) moving the indexer (15) to a second position (upper position);
e) closing the first gate valve (30);
f) opening the second gate valve (32);
g) inserting a processed substrate through the open second gate valve (as can be seen in Fig. 3C) and positioning the processed substrate on the lower substrate transfer arrangement (33B);
h) moving the indexer (15) to the first position (lower position) and coupling the one or more substrate handling members (151/152) into the corresponding open recesses (67) to cool the processed substrate;
i) removing the unprocessed substrate from the upper substrate transfer arrangement (33A) through the open second gate valve (as can be seen in Fig. 3E);
j) closing the second gate valve (32);
k) opening first gate valve (30);
l) inserting a second unprocessed substrate (repeating steps) through the open first gate valve (as can be seen in Fig. 3A) and positioning the second unprocessed substrate on the upper substrate transfer arrangement (33A);
m) moving indexer (15) to the second position (upper position); and
n) removing the cooled processed substrate from the lower substrate transfer arrangement (33B) through open first gate valve (as can be seen in Fig. 3G).
Galburt fails to explicitly teach wherein a crossbeam cantilevered and extending from the actuator assembly along a horizontal axis with respect to the actuator assembly; a plurality of substrate handling members coupled to the crossbeam; the indexer being radially offset from the cooling plate and the cooling plate being circular.
Rivkin teaches a crossbeam (a tie bar 146) cantilevered and extending from the actuator assembly (lift actuator 148) along a horizontal axis with respect to the actuator assembly (148), a plurality of substrate handling members (wafer seats 140, 142) coupled to the crossbeam (146), (as can be seen in Fig. 3).
Rivkin also teaches that the indexer (corresponding to wafer seats supports 198) being radially offset from the cooling plate (top surface 214 of the bottom portion 196 forms a cooling plate; Fig. 4; col.8, lines 16-17) and the cooling plate (214/196) being circular (see circular wafer 124 in Figs. 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Galburt such that a crossbeam cantilevered and extending from the actuator assembly along a horizontal axis with respect to the actuator assembly; a plurality of substrate handling members coupled to the crossbeam as taught by Rivkin to be more productive, reduces the time required for an individual wafer to be processed and decreases the amount of space required for the manufacturing facility (col.3, lines 30-35 of Rivkin).
In view of Rivkin’s teachings, it would also have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to change the shape of the cooling plate to form a circular plate since a change in shape is generally recognized at being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F. 2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
In regards to claim 19, Galburt as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 18. Further, Galburt teaches further comprising performing actions a-n sequentially (a sequence of operations in the load lock and choreography of wafer movement within the processing system is as follows with reference to FIGS. 3A-3G; col.5, lines 48-50).
In regards to claim 20, Galburt as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 18. Further, Galburt teaches further comprising proceeding to action e upon completing action n (FIGS. 3A-3G; col.5, lines 48-50).
Allowable Subject MatterClaims 8-10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim 1, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARTHA TADESSE whose telephone number is (571)272-0590. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30am-5:00pm EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Frantz Jules can be reached on 571-272-6681. 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.
/M.T/
Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/FRANTZ F JULES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763