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 with traverse of Group I (claims 1-19) in the reply filed on 10/22/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the process in the invention I fully encompasses the apparatus in Group II and so, there is no undue search burden. This is not found persuasive because the restriction is proper between the two groups for not only the search burden but they acquired a separate status in view of different classification as discussed in the previous office communication.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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) 1-3 and 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tanaka et al (US 2022/0093367).
Regarding claim 1, Tanaka et al disclose a method for etching a film (EF) of a substrate (W) through an opening (OP) of a mask (MK), the method comprising: by using a CVD method, forming a protective film (PF) formed of a silicon-containing substance on a surface in a chamber (10) of a plasma processing apparatus (1),
wherein the surface in the chamber (10) includes a lower surface of a ceiling plate (34), which resemble as the claimed “lid assembly” (see paragraphs [0029]-[0033], [0054]-[0055], [0058], [0062], figures 1-5); and etching the film (EF) of the substrate (W) which is placed on an upper surface of an electrostatic chuck (20), while the lower surface of the ceiling plate (34) is coated with the protective film (PF) (see paragraphs [0029]-[0030], [0036]-[0038], [0054], [0062], [0075], figures 1-5).
Tanaka et al disclose that the etching film (EF) (resemble as the claimed “target layer”) comprises silicon -containing film [0030] and the mask (MK) comprises carbon -containing film [0031].
Regarding claim 11, Tanaka et al disclose a method for etching a film (EF) of a substrate (W) through an opening (OP) of a mask (MK), the method comprising: by using a CVD method, forming a protective film (PF) formed of a silicon-containing substance on a surface in a chamber (10) of a plasma processing apparatus (1),
wherein the surface in the chamber (10) includes a lower surface of a ceiling plate (34), which resemble as the claimed “lid assembly” (see paragraphs [0029]-[0033], [0054]-[0055], [0058], [0062], figures 1-5); and etching the film (EF) of the substrate (W) which is placed on an upper surface of an electrostatic chuck (20), while the lower surface of the ceiling plate (34) is coated with the protective film (PF) (see paragraphs [0029]-[0030], [0036]-[0038], [0054], [0062], [0075], figures 1-5).
Tanaka et al disclose that the etching film (EF) (resemble as the claimed “target layer”) comprises silicon -containing film [0030] and the mask (MK) comprises carbon -containing film [0031].
Regarding claims 2 and 12, Tanaka et al disclose that forming the protective film (PF) made of a silicon-containing substance, the film-forming gas contains, for example, SiH4, SiC14, Si2Cl6, or SiF4) (see paragraph [0058]).
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Tanaka et al disclose that forming the protective film (PF) may be performed in a state where a dummy substrate (DW) is placed on a substrate support (16) (see paragraph [0054]).
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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 4-10 and 14-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka et al (US 2022/0093367) as applied to claims 1 and 11 above.
Regarding claims 4 and 16, Tanaka et al disclose above for the claims 1 and 11 but fails to disclose the claimed thickness of the protective film (PF) (resemble as the claimed “coating layer”.
However, without showing any criticality of such thickness of the coating layer, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art optimize the thickness of the PF layer for predictable result, in this instance, efficiently protecting the ceiling plate in the chamber.
Regarding claim 5, Tanaka et al disclose the ceiling plate (34) may be formed of a low resistance conductor or semiconductor with low Joule heat [0043], which semiconductor material reads on the lid assembly’s material.
Regarding claim 6, Tanaka et al disclose that the etching film (EF) is, for example, a silicon oxide film, a silicon nitride film, or a silicon-containing low dielectric constant film (see paragraph [0030]).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Tanaka et al disclose above for the claims 1 and 11 and Tanaka et al also disclose that after etching the film (EF), a cleaning gas is supplied into the chamber (10) and plasma is generated from the cleaning gas to completely remove the protective film (PF) (see paragraphs [0069]-[0070]).
Regarding claims 8 and 18, Tanaka et al disclose that a halogen-containing gas is used as the cleaning gas to remove the protective film PF (see paragraph [0071]), aforesaid halogen-containing gas reads on the claimed fluorine-containing gas.
Regarding claim 9, Tanaka et al disclose that, in a case where the protective film (PF) has been removed, forming the protective film (PF) is performed again (see paragraphs [0073]-[0074]).
Regarding claim 10 and 19, Tanaka et al disclose that the plasma processing apparatus (1) is an inductively coupled plasma processing apparatus (ICP) [0077].
Regarding claim 14, Tanaka et al disclose that the PF (coating layer) is formed on the lower surface of the ceiling plate 34 [0054]; and therefore, this PF is configured to suppress a release of oxygen form the ceiling plate (resemble as the claimed lid assembly).
Regarding claim 15, Tanaka et al disclose that the protective film (PF) is formed of a silicon-containing substance; and the film (EF) is etched by using hydrogen fluoride within the chamber (10); (see paragraphs [0055], [0063]), wherein the protective film is configured to release silicon as the instant invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record, listed in the PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAMIM AHMED whose telephone number is (571)272-1457. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH (8-5:30pm).
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, Joshua Allen can be reached at 571-270-3176. 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.
SHAMIM AHMED
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1713
/SHAMIM AHMED/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713