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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of group I comprising claims 1 – 9 in the reply filed on 6/29/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 10 – 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/29/2026.
Note Regarding Prior Art
Examiner cites particular sections, columns, line numbers, paragraphs and figures, in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the Applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Deok-Young Seong (KR 10-2020-0067224; hereinafter “Seong”).
Regarding claim 1, Seong teaches a system for monitoring internal conditions of a processing chamber (page 7, 4th paragraph; page 4, 5th paragraph; figure 1), the system comprising:
at least one sensor (correction micro balance 74 (quartz crystal microbalance)) provided inside the processing chamber (the correction micro balance 74 is arranged on the side wall of chamber 10) and configured to measure an amount of reactants accumulated inside the processing chamber (the correction micro balance 74 measures the amount of particles in the chamber 10); and
a monitoring apparatus configured to determine at least one of a start point and an end point of a cleaning process for the processing chamber on the basis of a change in the measurement value (the mass of the particles is sensed by the correction micro balance 74 and the optimal end point of the cleaning process can be determined on the curve change point in which the frequency is no longer shifted; page 7, 4th paragraph; the cleaning process measures the residue within the chamber 10 using the correction micro balance 74 and includes monitoring. The measured information about the residue can be provided to the central processing unit of the semiconductor device fabricating equipment 100. The information about the residue can provide information about the end point of the cleaning process; page 9, paragraphs 10 and 11).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 – 9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 2, the cited prior art neither teaches nor fairly suggests the system of claim 1, wherein the at least one sensor is a thin film-type sensor comprising:
a sensing module including a pair of substrates, a pair of electrodes provided between the pair of substrates, and a piezoelectric element provided between the pair of electrodes; and
a wireless communication module configured to transmit a measurement value measured by the sensing module to the monitoring apparatus through a wireless communication network.
Regarding claim 4, the cited prior art neither teaches nor fairly suggests the system of claim 1, wherein the monitoring apparatus determines the start point of the cleaning process on the basis of the measurement value reaching a threshold value.
Regarding claim 6, the cited prior art neither teaches nor fairly suggests the system of claim 1, wherein the monitoring apparatus determines the end point of the cleaning process on the basis of the change in the measurement value within a preset range after the start point of the cleaning process.
Regarding claim 8, the cited prior art neither teaches nor fairly suggests the system of claim 1, wherein the at least one sensor includes a plurality of sensors, wherein the plurality of sensors is provided at different locations inside the processing chamber, and
the monitoring apparatus determines the start point of the cleaning process on the basis of whether at least one of
measurement values measured by the plurality of sensors is below a preset threshold value, and determines the end point of the cleaning process on the basis of the measurement values measured by the plurality of sensors changing within a preset range.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN J. SINES whose telephone number is (571)272-1263. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM-5 PM 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, Lyle Alexander can be reached at (571) 272-1254. 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.
BRIAN J. SINES
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 1796
/BRIAN J. SINES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1796
Prosecution Insights