Detailed Correspondence
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 Species A, Fig. 2, in the reply filed on 06/24/2026 is acknowledged.
Applicants designated claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-15, and 20 readable into Species A.
Claims 4, 8, and 16-19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species B, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 06/24/2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: “to each of the output terminal” should be “to each of the output terminals“.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-3, 5-7, 9-15, and 20 are 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 10 each recites “wherein the plurality of filters is configured to have different frequency characteristics”, it is not clear what it means by frequency characteristics. Is phase shift considered a frequency characteristics? The examiner notices Applicants’ Figure 7 shows power transmittance as frequency characteristics, but it is referred to as an example. The examiner cannot find a definition of frequency characteristics in Applicants’ Specification. It is also not clear whether two filters having the same power transmittance but differ in absorption and reflection is “different frequency characteristics” or not.
Claims 1 and 10 will be examined inclusive all of the above interpretations.
Claim 11 recites “a set of the filter, the output terminal, the slot antenna, and the transmission window” and claim 13 recites “a plurality of outer cells including the filter and the output terminal”, raises antecedent issues as filters, terminals, a slot antenna, a transmission window were mentioned early in claim 10.
Claim 11 and 13 will be examined inclusive a plurality of sets, each set having the claimed components.
Claim 15 recites “wherein the frequency characteristics have two types within a same system, and wherein different systems share two types of frequencies”, it is not clear what is a system, therefore, not clear what is different systems, is it a single cell, double cells, or any other component(s)? It is also not clear what is a type or two types, is a type differ in frequency range, differ in phase, transmittance or reflectance?
Claim 15 will be examined inclusive all of the above interpretations.
Claim 20 recites “wherein frequency characteristic of the matcher in the inner cell is different from the frequency characteristics of the filters in the respective outer cells”, besides the “frequency characteristics” is not clear as discussed in claims 1 and 10 rejection above, it is further not clear whether “frequency characteristics” is a property of the filter(s) or the property of the matcher(s).
Claim 20 will be examined inclusive both interpretations.
Dependent claims 2-3, 5-7, 9, 11-15, and 20 are also rejected under USC 112(b) at least due to dependency to rejected claims 1 and 10, respectively.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 7, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirayama et al (US 20100096362, same as IDS KR 1020090117806, hereafter ‘362), in view of Yamamoto et al. (US 20010050058, hereafter ‘058).
‘362 teaches some limitations of:
Claim 1: A microwave of 120 kW … outputted from two microwave sources 900 is transmitted through a branch waveguide 905, eight coaxial waveguide converters 605, eight coaxial waveguides 620, seven coaxial waveguides 600 connected with each of eight branch coaxial waveguides 670 (see FIGS. 2 and 4) and arranged in parallel to each other in a rear surface direction of FIG. 1, a branch plate 610 and the coaxial waveguide 315. Then, the microwave passes through the plurality of dielectric plates 305 and is supplied into the processing space ([0119], includes the claimed “A distributor for distributing electromagnetic waves to a plurality of output terminals, the distributor comprising: a power supply terminal configured to be electrically connected to a radio-frequency power source“, note coaxial waveguide 600 is the claimed “power supply terminal”),
the microwave source 900 outputting a microwave of about 915 MHz is used, but the microwave source outputting a microwave of about 896 MHz, 922 MHz or 2.45 GHz may be used ([0201], includes the claimed “configured to be capable of varying frequency”, either by manually switching to difference microwave sources or obvious to adopt an adjustable frequence microwave source);
a microwave transmitted from a microwave source 900 to a coaxial waveguide 600 via a branch waveguide 905 is split into a plurality of microwaves by a branch plate 610 and then transmitted to each internal conductor 315a of a plurality of coaxial waveguides (abstract, includes the claimed “and a plurality of filters provided respectively at the plurality of output terminals to which the electromagnetic waves input to the power supply terminal are distributed”).
‘362 does not teach the other limitations of:
Claim 1: wherein the plurality of filters is configured to have different frequency characteristics.
‘058 is analogous art in the field of a plasma processing apparatus (title), A plurality of microwave introduction windows (abstract, note Fig. 1 is similar to Fig. 6 of ‘362 in branched waveguide). ’058 teaches that microwave transmission paths formed of branched waveguides 3a, 3b each have transmission path impedance, which includes the plasma load impedance. The factor affecting the transmission path impedance, however, is not limited to the plasma load impedance. Other factors as follows, for example, would also alter the transmission path impedance (Fig. 1, [0079], see also [0080]-[0084]), it is important to adjust the assembled states of transmission paths formed of the waveguides ([0085]), microwaves of the same power can be introduced into microwave introduction windows 2a and 2a (or 2b and 2b) that are equivalent to each other in location relationship, while microwave of different power can be introduced into microwave introduction windows 2a and 2b that are non-equivalent to each other in location relationship ([0061]), for the purpose of generating uniform plasma ([0086], last sentence).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have alter the transmission path impedance, as taught by ‘058, to the branched waved guides of ‘362, for the purpose of generating uniform plasma, as taught by ‘058 ([0086], last sentence).
‘362 further teaches the limitations of:
Claim 7: Fig. 3 shows the claimed “wherein each of the number of the output terminals and the number of the filters is 2” (Note Fig. 1 has eight coaxial waveguide converters 605 and sixteen filters).
Claim 9: Fig. 3 also shows the claimed “wherein a path between the power supply terminal and each of the filters is branched into branches in a middle”,
The dielectric members 615 made of Teflon (registered trademark) are installed at upper and lower sides of the position Bp of FIG. 3. The dielectric members 615 are installed to support the branch plate 610 and to provide an impedance matching function ([0141], includes the claimed “and wherein a matcher configured to match the electromagnetic wave is provided between the power supply terminal and the branches”).
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘362, in view of ‘058 and Oka (JP 2006286269, hereafter ‘269).
‘362 teaches some limitations of:
Claim 10: a plasma processing apparatus (Fig. 1, [0100], includes the claimed “A plasma processing apparatus, comprising”):
A plasma processing apparatus 10 includes a processing chamber 100 ([0102], includes the claimed “a processing container”);
the microwave source 900 outputting a microwave of about 915 MHz is used, but the microwave source outputting a microwave of about 896 MHz, 922 MHz or 2.45 GHz may be used ([0201], includes the claimed “a radio-frequency power source configured to be capable of varying frequency”, either by manually switching to difference sources or obvious to adopt an adjustable frequence microwave source);
A microwave of 120 kW … outputted from two microwave sources 900 is transmitted through a branch waveguide 905, eight coaxial waveguide converters 605, eight coaxial waveguides 620, seven coaxial waveguides 600 connected with each of eight branch coaxial waveguides 670 (see FIGS. 2 and 4) and arranged in parallel to each other in a rear surface direction of FIG. 1, a branch plate 610 and the coaxial waveguide 315. Then, the microwave passes through the plurality of dielectric plates 305 and is supplied into the processing space ([0119], includes the claimed “a distributor configured to distribute electromagnetic wave output by the radio-frequency power source to a plurality of output terminals” and “wherein the distributor includes: a power supply terminal configured to be electrically connected to the radio-frequency power source”);
a microwave transmitted from a microwave source 900 to a coaxial waveguide 600 via a branch waveguide 905 is split into a plurality of microwaves by a branch plate 610 and then transmitted to each internal conductor 315a of a plurality of coaxial waveguides (abstract, includes the claimed “and a plurality of filters provided respectively at the plurality of output terminals to which the electromagnetic wave input to the power supply terminal are distributed”).
‘362 does not teach the other limitations of:
Claim 10: (10A) a slot antenna connected to each of the output terminal;
a transmission window configured to transmit the electromagnetic wave radiated from the slot antenna, and configured to supply the electromagnetic wave into the processing container,
(10B) wherein the plurality of filters is configured to have different frequency characteristics.
‘058 is analogous art as discussed above.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have altered the transmission path impedance, as taught by ‘058, to the branched waved guides of ‘362 (the limitation of 10B), for the purpose of generating uniform plasma, as taught by ‘058 ([0086], last sentence).
‘269 is analogous art in the field of plasma processing apparatus (title), a processing chamber using microwaves and performs a CVD process or an etching process on the LCD substrate ([0002]), A plasma processing apparatus is provided, which is provided with a filter unit that allows only microwaves of a frequency to pass therethrough ([0006], last sentence). ’269 teaches that The lid 3 has a configuration in which a thin plate-like slot antenna 21 is attached to the lower surface of the lid body 20, and a plurality of dielectrics 22 are attached to the lower surface of the slot antenna 21 (Fig. 1, [0017]), Each dielectric 22 is made of, for example, quartz glass, AlN, Al2O3, sapphire, SiN, ceramics, or the like ([0021], same as Applicants’ window, [0041]), a slot for propagating microwaves supplied from the respective microwave sources to the dielectrics may be provided for each of the plurality of dielectrics ([0009]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have added slot antenna 21and dielectrics/window 22, to each of the waveguides 620 of ‘362 (the limitation of 10A), for the purpose of control the propagating microwaves, as taught by ‘269 ([0009]).
Note ‘269 also teaches that The phase of the electric field and the magnetic field can be adjusted by appropriately moving the short plate 136 of each of the adjusters 131A to 131D by the short plate driving mechanisms 137 and 138. As a result, the impedance in the transmission waveguide 51 can be adjusted. It is the structure which can be changed. That is, the impedance of the entire load including the transmission waveguide 51, the waveguide 25, and the processing container 2 is matched with the impedance of the microwave source 52, thereby preventing the generation of reflected waves. In this way, the control of the tuner unit can be simplified by interlocking the adjusters 131A and 131B and the adjusters 131C and 131D (Fig. 6, [0051], see also Fig. 2, three waveguides connect to the transmission waveguide, it is also capable of provides the three waveguides 25 with different frequency characteristics both in phase and transmission percentage).
The combination of ‘362, ‘058, and ‘269 further teaches the limitations of:
Claim 11: As shown in FIG. 10 which is a cross-sectional view taken along line F-F of FIG. 8, in an inner space of the distribution waveguide 910, an internal conductor 600a of a coaxial waveguide is inserted into the center thereof and four internal conductors 315a are inserted into positions in point symmetry with respect to a central axis of the coaxial waveguide 600 (‘362, [0149], includes the claimed “wherein a plurality of cells, each of which is a set of the filter, the output terminal, the slot antenna, and the transmission window, is arranged on a same circumference on an upper surface of the processing container”).
Claim 12, and alternative claim 11, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘362, ‘058, and ‘269, as being applied to claim 11 rejection above, further in view of Kurihara et al. (US 20040026040, hereafter ‘040).
The combination of ‘362, ‘058, and ‘269 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 12: wherein the plurality of cells is arranged as 2n cells at equal intervals on the circumference where n is an integer of 1 or more, wherein the distributor distributes the electromagnetic wave to two of the cells and includes n systems each connected to the radio-frequency power source, and
wherein the frequency characteristics of the filters are different in the respective cells.
‘040 is analogous art in the field of plasma processing apparatus (title), a UHF (100 MHz-3 GHz) high frequency power supply ([0023], i.e. microwave). ’040 teaches that the antenna elements are to form a loop current, preferably they should be arc-shaped antenna elements 302 each bearing two terminals 301 and rotationally symmetrical, as illustrated in FIG. 3A ([0048]), a method (phase control type) in which electric power with different phases is impressed on a plurality of antenna elements ([0017]), for the purpose of high density plasma ([0027]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have replaced the lattice like arrangement in Fig. 2 of ‘362 with the antenna arranged in Fig. 3A of ‘040, for the purpose of high density plasma, as taught by ‘040 ([0027]).
The arrangement of Fig. 3A of ‘040 clearly reads into claim 11.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘362, ‘058, and ‘269, as being applied to claim 10 rejection above, further in view of Ikeda et al. (US 20140361684, hereafter ‘684).
‘269 teaches some limitations of:
Claim 13: The lid 3 has a configuration in which a thin plate-like slot antenna 21 is attached to the lower surface of the lid body 20, and a plurality of dielectrics 22 are attached to the lower surface of the slot antenna 21 (Fig. 1, [0017]), Each dielectric 22 is made of, for example, quartz glass, AlN, Al2O3, sapphire, SiN, ceramics, or the like ([0021], includes the claimed “wherein a cell, which is a set of the slot antenna and the transmission window”).
The combination of ‘362, ‘058, and ‘269 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 13: includes: an inner cell including a matcher for matching the electromagnetic wave, and arranged at a center of an upper surface of the processing container; and
a plurality of outer cells including the filter and the output terminal, and arranged on the upper surface of the processing container to surround a vicinity of the inner cell.
‘684 is analogous art in the field of MICROWAVE EMISSION MECHANISM, MICROWAVE PLASMA SOURCE AND SURFACE WAVE PLASMA PROCESSING APPARATUS (title), an antenna having a slot through which the microwave is emitted, a dielectric member through which the microwave emitted from the antenna is transmitted (abstract). ’684 teaches that As shown in FIG. 3, the microwave supply unit 40 has seven antenna modules 41, and the microwave emission mechanisms 43 of the seven antenna modules 41 are arranged on the circular ceiling plate 110, wherein one microwave emission mechanism 43 is disposed at a center of the ceiling plate 110 and six microwave emission mechanisms 43 are disposed along a circumference of the ceiling plate 110 ([0040], last sentence), The microwave emission mechanism 43 has a tuner 60 for matching an impedance and an antenna section 45 for emitting the amplified microwave into the chamber 1 ([0040], 3rd sentence), for the purpose of increasing plasma/electron density ([0010]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have replaced the lattice like arrangement in Fig. 2 of ‘362 with the antenna arranged in Fig. 3 of ‘684, for the purpose of increasing plasma/electron density, as taught by ‘684 ([0010]).
Claims 14-15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘362, ‘058, ‘269, and ‘684, as being applied to claim 13 rejection above, further in view of ‘040.
The combination of ‘362, ‘058, ‘269, and ‘684 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 14: wherein the plurality of outer cells is arranged as 2n outer cells at equal intervals on a same circumference where n is an integer of 1 or more,
wherein the distributor distributes the electromagnetic wave to two of the outer cells and includes n systems each connected to the radio-frequency power source, and
wherein the frequency characteristics of the filters are different in respective outer cells belonging to a same system among the outer cells.
Claim 15: wherein the frequency characteristics have two types within a same system, and
wherein different systems share two types of frequencies.
‘040 is analogous art in the field of plasma processing apparatus (title), a UHF (100 MHz-3 GHz) high frequency power supply ([0023], i.e. microwave). ’040 teaches that the antenna elements are to form a loop current, preferably they should be arc-shaped antenna elements 302 each bearing two terminals 301 and rotationally symmetrical, as illustrated in FIG. 3A ([0048]), a method (phase control type) in which electric power with different phases is impressed on a plurality of antenna elements ([0017]), for the purpose of high density plasma ([0027]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have connected the six microwave emission mechanisms 43 of ‘684 into three pairs, as taught by Fig. 3A of ‘040, and then combined with ‘362, ‘058, and ‘269, for the purpose of high density plasma, as taught by ‘040 ([0027]). As various properties of the antenna can be tuned, it is considered meeting the limitation of claim 15, see 112(b) rejection above.
The combination of ‘362, ‘058, ‘269, ‘684, and ‘040 further teaches the limitations of:
Claim 20: that the microwave of different power can be introduced into microwave introduction windows 2a and 2b that are non-equivalent to each other in location relationship (‘058, [0061], it would have been obvious to have applied a different power to the center cell than the outer cell, includes the claimed “wherein frequency characteristic of the matcher in the inner cell is different from the frequency characteristics of the filters in the respective outer cells”).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 2-3 and 5-6 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12463013 in view of ‘362 and ‘058.
Claim 2 is substantially the same as claim 1 of US Patent No. 12463013 and ‘362 and ‘058 teaches claim 1 of instant Application as discussed above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20140197761 is cited for vary the value of the electron cyclotron resonance surface by varying the frequency of the wave for the application device 30 (Fig. 7, [0112]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEATH T CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1870. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-5:00 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.
/KEATH T CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights