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 claims 1-11 and 20 in the reply filed on June 15, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Interpretation
The term controller is recited in claims 3, 4, and 20 and is interpreted as controller 190 according to the original specification [0104] and may include a substrate treatment condition determination part 191, an RF power controller 193, a current controller 195, and so on.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Substrate supporting unit as recited in claims 1-11 and 20 where the functional language is substrate supporting while the generic placeholder is unit
RF power supply part as recited in claims 1-6, 8, 9, and 20 where the functional language is RF power supply while the generic placeholder is part
Refrigerant supply part as recited in claims 11 and 20 where the functional language is refrigerant supply while the generic placeholder is part
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Substrate supporting unit is interpreted as element 30 which may include an electrostatic chuck 31 according to the originally filed specification [0065].
RF power supply part is interpreted as element 170 which may include an AR power generator 171, a power regulator 173, an RF filter 175 according to the originally filed specification [0094].
Refrigerant supply part is interpreted as element 160 which supplies refrigerant to the refrigerant flow path 121 provided in the inner body 120 and the refrigerant flow path 141 provided in the outer body 140 through a refrigerant line 161 according to the originally filed specification [0114].
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamazawa (US 9,351,389).
Regarding claim 1: Yamazawa teaches a substrate treatment apparatus comprising: a chamber 10 provided with a treatment space in which a plasma substrate treatment process is performed; a substrate supporting unit (susceptor 12) which is disposed in the treatment space and on which a substrate to be treated is seated; an inner coil 58 wound in a first direction; an outer coil 62 disposed outside the inner coil and wound in a second direction opposite to the first direction (see col. 20 lines 56-63); a current regulator connecting the inner coil and the outer coil in series (see col. 3 lines 30-33; see Fig. 6, Fig. 12; col. 11 lines 27-32; col. 13 lines 59- 63; col. 14 lines 40-44; col. 17 lines 3058, col. 18 lines 25-36; col. 21 line 50) between the inner coil and the outer coil, the current regulator (capacitors 88(1), 88(2))being configured to convert a current; and an RF power supply part (high frequency power supply 72) configured to selectively supply power to the inner coil or the outer coil so as to form plasma in the treatment space. See Figs. 1 and 2A of Yamazawa below.
PNG
media_image1.png
812
638
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
780
624
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2. See the teachings of Yamazawa where a first side distal end of the inner coil 58 and a first side distal end of the outer coil 62 are connected to the RF power supply part, and a second side distal end of the inner coil and a second side distal end of the outer coil are connected to the current regulator, so that the inner coil and the outer coil are connected with each other in series via the current regulator. See Figs. 2B, 5B, 8B, 9A, 9B, 10B, 10C-10E, 11B, 14B-14E, 15B, 16B, 17B, 18B, 19B-19E, 21B, and 22-28 of Yamazawa.
Regarding claim 3. See the apparatus of Yamazawa where a controller 86 configured to control the RF power supply part 72 so that power intensity is adjusted and RF power is selectively supplied to the inner coil 58 and the outer coil 62, the controller being configured to control the current regulator (capacitors 88(1), 88(2)) so that current intensity between the inner coil and the outer coil is changed. See col. 14 lines 35-48 of Yamazawa. See Fig. 9A-10B, 18A-19E.
PNG
media_image3.png
580
644
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4. The substrate treatment apparatus of claim 3, wherein the controller 86 is configured to adjust plasma density by controlling the power of the RF power supply part 72 and by controlling the current of the current regulator (88(1), 88(2) such that a plasma density value of a center region of the substrate which is to be treated and which is seated on the substrate supporting unit 12 and a plasma density value of an outer region of the substrate are different from each other. See col. 13 lines 5-15.
Regarding claim 5. The substrate treatment apparatus of claim 1, wherein the RF power supply part 72 is configured to apply the power to the inner coil 58, and the current regulator(88(1), 88(2) is configured to increase or decrease intensity of current output from the inner coil and to apply the current to the outer coil 62. See col. 13 lines 5-15.
Regarding claim 6. The substrate treatment apparatus of claim 1, wherein the RF power supply part 72 is configured to apply the power to the outer coil, and the current regulator (88(1), 88(2) is configured to decrease or increase intensity of current output from the outer coil and to apply the current to the inner coil. See col. 13 lines 5-15.
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.
Claims 8, 9, 11, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazawa (US 9,351,389) in view of Lee (US 9, 894,745).
The teachings of Yamazawa were discussed above.
The prior art of Yamazawa fails to teach the plurality of inner coils and outer coils are disposed of in a multi-layer structure as recited in claim 8.
Regarding claim 8. Namely, the prior art of Yamazawa fails to teach the substrate treatment apparatus of claim 1, wherein the inner coil comprises a plurality of inner coils disposed in a multi-layer structure and electrically separated from each other, the outer coil comprises a plurality of outer coils disposed in a multi-layer structure and electrically separated from each other corresponding to the plurality of inner coils, and the current regulator comprises a plurality of current regulators which is respectively connected between the plurality of inner coils and the plurality of outer coils corresponding to the plurality of inner coils and which is configured to convert the current.
Regarding claim 9. The substrate treatment apparatus of claim 8, wherein the RF power supply part is configured to selectively apply the power to the plurality of inner coils and the plurality of outer coils, and the current regulator is configured to individually decrease or increase intensity of the current between the plurality of inner coils and the plurality of outer coils.
The prior art of Lee teaches antenna structure and plasma generating device. See the prior art of Lee illustrates the inner coils and outer coils having a multilayered structures. See Fig. 1A,2A, 3A, 4, 6, and 7 of Lee where the inner coils are 112, 122 and outer coils 110, 120 which are multilayered (upper and lower sections) so that plasma is formed inside and outside respectively so that the radial uniformity of plasma may be improved. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the present invention to modify the plasma apparatus of Yamazawa with the multilayered inner and outer coils suggested by Lee to enhance the radial uniformity of plasma.
Also, the prior art of Yamazawa fails to teach a refrigerant flow path, namely:
Regarding claim 11. The substrate treatment apparatus of claim 1, further comprising: an inner body on which the inner coil is wound and in which a refrigerant flow path is formed therein; an outer body on which the outer coil is wound and in which a refrigerant flow path is formed therein; and a refrigerant supply part configured to supply a refrigerant to the refrigerant flow path of the inner body and the refrigerant flow path of the outer body.
Regarding claim 20. The prior art of Yamazawa teaches a substrate treatment apparatus comprising: a chamber 10 provided with a treatment space in which a plasma substrate treatment process is performed; a substrate supporting unit (susceptor 12) which is disposed in the treatment space and on which a substrate to be treated is seated; an inner coil 58 wound in a first direction; an inner body on which the inner coil is wound a; an outer coil 62disposed relatively outside the inner coil and wound in a second direction opposite to the first direction; an outer body on which the outer coil is wound; a current regulator connecting the inner coil and the outer coil in series between the inner coil and the outer coil, the current regulator being configured to convert a current; an RF power supply part configured to selectively supply power to the inner coil or the outer coil so as to form plasma in the treatment space. Yamazawa teaches a controller 86 configured to control the RF power supply part so that power intensity is adjusted and RF power is selectively supplied to the inner coil and the outer coil, the controller being configured to control the current regulator so that current intensity between the inner coil and the outer coil is changed, thereby adjusting plasma density such that a plasma density value of a center region of the substrate to be treated and a plasma density value of an outer region of the substrate to be treated are different from each other.
The prior art of Yamazawa fails to teach refrigerant supply part configured to supply a refrigerant to the refrigerant flow path of the inner body and the refrigerant flow path of the outer body.
The prior art of Lee in col. 4 lines 37-40 teaches the induction antenna 101 may have a pipe shape and may be cooled by refrigerant such as air or fluids. The refrigerant may flow through insides of the induction antennas 101 (inner coils and outer coils) so that the temperature of the antenna can be controlled/maintained. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the present invention to modify the plasma apparatus of Yamazawa with the refrigerant supply part suggested by Lee.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazawa (US 9,351,389) in view of Collins et al (US 6,054,013).
The teachings of Yamazawa were discussed above.
The teachings of Yamazawa fail to teach:
Regarding claim 7. The substrate treatment apparatus of claim 1, wherein the RF power supply part comprises: an RF power generator configured to generate RF power; a power regulator configured to adjust a supply direction and intensity of the power; and an RF filter configured to adjust a frequency band of the RF power and to output the RF power.
The prior art of Collins et al teaches a parallel plate electrode plasma reactor with an inductive antenna and adjustable radial distribution of plasma ion density. Fig. 23 of Collins et al illustrates the wafer pedestal and silicon ceiling are separately driven with RF power and each serves as a counter electrode for the other. See col. 22 lines 13-23 where RF filters 310, 315, 320, 325, 330, 335 are constructed of capacitors and inductors. The RF filters are suitable high-pass and low-pass filters with suitability selected cut-ff frequencies. The motivation to modify the apparatus s of Yamazawa as suggested by Collins et al is that the filters adjust the frequency band on each RF power in order to further enhance power control. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the apparatus of Yamazawa with RF filters as suggested by Collins et al to provide RF filters to enhance power control.
PNG
media_image4.png
804
512
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazawa (US 9,351,389) in view of Lee (US 9, 894,745), as applied to claims 8, 9, 11, and 20, and in further view of Collins et al (US 6,054,013).
The apparatus resulting from the combined teachings of Yamazawa and Lee were discussed above.
Regarding claim 10. The combined teachings of Yamazawa and Lee fail teaches a substrate treatment apparatus of claim 8, wherein the RF power supply part comprises: an RF power generator (recall RF power supply part 72 in Yamazawa and controller 86 which teaches the control of power supplies 30 and 72 which suggests power regulation by the controller) configured to generate RF power.
The prior art of Yamazawa fails to teach a plurality of power regulators configured to individually adjust a supply direction and intensity of the power by corresponding to the plurality of inner coils and the plurality of outer coils. First, the obviousness of using a plurality of power regulators is supported by the duplication of part per (In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378). Furthermore, the prior art of Lee teaches a power distribution unit 62 may be formed of inductors, capacitors, etc in col. 7 lines 25-27.
The apparatus resulting from the combined teachings of Yamazawa and Lee fail to teach:
a plurality of RF filters configured to adjust a frequency band of each RF power by corresponding to the plurality of inner coils and the plurality of outer coils and to output the RF power.
The prior art of Collins et al teaches a parallel plate electrode plasma reactor with an inductive antenna and adjustable radial distribution of plasma ion density. Fig. 23 of Collins et al illustrates the wafer pedestal and silicon ceiling are separately driven with RF power and each serves as a counter electrode for the other. See col. 22 lines 13-23 where RF filters 310, 315, 320, 325, 330, 335 are constructed of capacitors and inductors. The RF filters are suitable high-pass and low-pass filters with suitability selected cut-ff frequencies. The motivation to modify the apparatus resulting from the combined teachings of Yamazawa and Lee with RF filters as suggested by Collins et al is that the filters adjust the frequency band on each RF power in order to further enhance power control. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the apparatus resulting from the combined teachings of Yamazawa and Lee with RF filters as suggested by Collins et al to provide RF filters to enhance power control.
PNG
media_image5.png
780
607
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
KR 10-2007-0121395 teaches an inductively coupled plasma antenna with a coil 220 formed in a closed loop with first coil 222 and second coil 224 where the current flows in opposite directions.
Oh US 6,806,437 teaches inductively coupled plasma generating apparatus that incorporates double layered coil antenna.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYLVIA MACARTHUR whose telephone number is (571)272-1438. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5 pm.
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, Parviz Hassanzadeh can be reached at 571-272-1435. 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.
/SYLVIA MACARTHUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights