DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to Applicant’s Reply filed 9/11/2025.
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 .
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.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 9/11/2025 has been entered.
Claim Status
Claims 1, 3-4, and 7-11 are pending.
Claims 10-11 are withdrawn.
Claims 2 and 5-6 are cancelled.
Claims 1, 7, and 8 are currently amended.
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.
Claims 1, 3-4, and 7-9 (all pending, non-withdrawn claims) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohizumi (US Pub. 2011/0126985) in view of Leung (US Pub. 2007/0039942), Song (US Pub. 2018/0298495), and Frijlink (US Patent 4,860,687).
Regarding claim 1, Ohizumi teaches a deposition apparatus (Fig. 1, entirety) comprising: a processing chamber ([0037] and Fig. 1, container #1); a rotary table rotatably provided in the processing chamber ([0037] and Fig. 1, rotary table #2), a plurality of stages provided along a rotation direction of the rotary table (Fig. 20A, placement member #250 provided in plurality as in Fig. 3), and each configured to mount a substrate thereon (Fig. 20A, substrate W); and a heater configured to heat the substrate mounted on each stage of the plurality of stages ([0063] and Fig. 1, heater #7); wherein the rotary table has a plurality of recesses along the rotation direction of the rotary table (see Figs. 2-3), wherein the stages are supported by the rotary table (Fig. 3, plurality of substrates W).
Ohizumi does not teach wherein the rotary table includes a coolant flow channel therein.
However, Leung teaches wherein the rotary table includes a coolant flow channel therein (Leung – [0035] and Fig. 4A, cooling channels #136 within body #124).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify the Ohizumi apparatus to comprise the cooling channels of Leung in order to cool the susceptor after high temperature processing and/or during cleaning (Leung – [0007]).
Ohizumi modified by Leung does not teach wherein a plurality of grooves are provided in a bottom surface of each of the plurality of recesses along a circumferential direction of a corresponding recess among the plurality of recesses, wherein the plurality of grooves extend along radial directions of the corresponding recess, wherein a plurality of supports are provided in the plurality of grooves, each of the plurality of supports having a spherical shape, wherein the plurality of supports support a corresponding stage among the plurality of stages by being in point contact with the corresponding stage, wherein the plurality of stages are supported by the rotary table while being thermally isolated from the rotary table.
However, Song teaches wherein a plurality of grooves are provided in a bottom surface of a recess (Song – [0055] and Fig. 4, hole holding ball #225) along a circumferential direction of a recess (Song – see Figs. 3-4, at least two positions below a substrate and between the holder), wherein the plurality of grooves extend along radial directions of the corresponding recess (Song – see Figs. 3-4, each hole holding ball #225 has a dimension radially outward of the wafer center), wherein a plurality of supports are provided in the plurality of grooves (Song – [0055] and Fig. 4, plurality of balls #225), each of the plurality of supports having a spherical shape (Song – [0055]), wherein the plurality of supports support a stage by being in point contact with the corresponding stage (Song – Figs. 3-4, each ball #225 supports a bottom surface of support #210 by point contact), wherein the plurality of stages are supported while being thermally isolated (Song – Figs. 3-4, the balls #225 provide at least some separation of #210 and #222).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to further modify the modified Ohizumi apparatus by including the ball/groove structure of Song in order to prevent the stages from deviating while rotating (Song – [0054], [0055]).
Ohizumi modified by Leung and Song does not appear to teach wherein a bottom surface of each groove of the plurality of grooves is inclined upward from an inner side of the corresponding recess toward an outer side of the corresponding recess.
However, Frijlink teaches wherein a bottom surface of a stage has an inclined surface (Frijlink – C5, L3-13 and Fig. 4a).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to further modify the stages of the modified Ohizumi apparatus to comprise the conical structure of Frijlink in order to prevent lateral displacement of the stage without preventing it from rotating (Frijlink – C4, L66-68).
Thus, as a combination, if the stages of modified Ohizumi apparatus were further modified to comprise the conical structure of Frijlink, it would comprise upward/outward inclined surfaces such that the plurality of grooves would have the same.
Additionally, the Examiner notes that Frijlink discloses an additional embodiment in Fig. 4b that is substantially similar to the structure of Ohizumi Fig. 20A (used in the rejection of this claim).
As such, the Examiner submits that it would also be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to enact the modification as proposed above as a simple substitution to achieve predictable results. As Frijlink teaches either of the structures in 4a and 4b are advantageous in preventing lateral displacement of the stage without preventing it from rotating (Frijlink – C4, L66-68), Frijlink appears to further strengthen a prima facie case of obviousness by demonstrating their interchangeability.
Regarding claim 3, Ohizumi modified by Leung does not teach the added limitations of the claim.
However, Song teaches wherein the plurality of supports are separate members from the table (Song – balls #225 different than #222 and/or #210).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to further modify the modified Ohizumi apparatus by including the ball/groove structure of Song in order to prevent the stages from deviating while rotating (Song – [0054], [0055]).
Regarding claim 4, Ohizumi modified by Leung does not teach the added limitations of the claim.
However, Song teaches wherein the plurality of supports are movable along a radial directions of the corresponding recess (Song – Fig. 4, balls #225 appear to be rotatable in three dimensions, thus could be rotating along a radial line relative to the wafer center).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to further modify the modified Ohizumi apparatus by including the ball/groove structure of Song in order to prevent the stages from deviating while rotating (Song – [0054], [0055]).
Regarding claim 7, Ohizumi teaches an inner diameter of each recess of the plurality of recesses is larger than a diameter of each stage of the plurality of stages (see Fig. 20A).
Ohizumi modified by Leung does not teach wherein the plurality of supports are configured to support a peripheral edge portion of each of the stages.
However, Song teaches wherein the supports are provided on a bottom surface of each of the recesses, and are configured to support a peripheral edge portion of the corresponding stage (Song – see Figs. 3-4, #225 seated in the surrounding hole, supporting an edge of #210).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to further modify the modified Ohizumi apparatus by including the ball/groove structure of Song in order to prevent the stages from deviating while rotating (Song – [0054], [0055]).
Regarding claim 8, Ohizumi teaches wherein the bottom surface of each recess of the plurality of recesses has an opening, and a lower surface of each stage of the plurality of stages is exposed from the opening (see Fig. 20A).
Regarding claim 9, Ohizumi teaches wherein the plurality of stages are rotatable relative to the rotary table ([0107]: members #250 are detachable from rotary table #2, thus would be rotatable due to their circular shape and “floating” arrangement).
Response to Arguments
Applicant has amended claims 1, 7, and 8 to correct minor informalities, thus the objections are withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments have been carefully considered, but are moot in light of the new grounds of rejection as presented herein. The Examiner respectfully submits that Frijlink remedies any alleged deficiencies of the other prior art of record.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kurt Sweely whose telephone number is (571)272-8482. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at (571)-272-5166. 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.
/Kurt Sweely/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718