DETAILED ACTION
Final
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 07/20/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment/Arguments
Claims 1-3, 5-20 are pending. Claims 1, 2, 3, 8, 19 and 20 are currently amended. Claim 4 is canceled. It appears that no new matter has been entered. The amendments to the claims have required further search and/or consideration and adjustment of the rejections to meet the claim amendments as filed. In particular, new primary reference Igarashi as seen below is now applied, the amendments along with the arguments pertaining thereto have overcome the rejections of the claims over Horita in the non final action. Considering that the remarks pertain to Horita and not Igarashi, this action must be 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 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.
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) 1, 3, 6-8, 12-17, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Igarashi (US 2022/0259736);
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Igarashi as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Okajima (US 10453735);
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Igarashi as applied to claims 1 and 8 above and further in view of Horita (US 2020/0024731);
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Igarashi, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Noda (US 2015/0332916);
Igarashi discloses in claim 1: A substrate processing apparatus (see abstract and figures 5-7), comprising: an inner container (at 244/250) forming a process chamber that is configured to accommodate a substrate (at 238); an outer container (at 246) configured to surround a side wall of the inner container (as shown) to provide an exhaust space (“S”) between the inner container and the outer container; an inner exhaust port (252) provided at the side wall of the inner container such that the inner exhaust port is provided at a position facing an arrangement region of the substrate in the process chamber (252 faces 238 figure 5); an outer exhaust port (via 278) provided at the outer container such that the outer exhaust port is provided at a position different from the position of the inner exhaust port in a circumferential direction (per an angle theta) of the side wall of the inner container; a first processing gas supply system (one of 271b,272b,273b) configured to supply a first processing gas (as shown) into the inner container; and an inert gas supply system (278 figure 7) configured to supply an inert gas (via 284a,b) to the exhaust space (via 283a,b) from a gas supply port (from opening top of 284a,b), the gas supply port provided at a position between the inner exhaust port (252) and the outer exhaust port (278) in the circumferential direction (as seen in figure 6) and at a position closer (284b is located closer…) to the outer exhaust port (278) than the inner exhaust port in the circumferential direction .
Igarashi discloses in claim 2: The substrate processing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the gas supply port is provided at a height position which is [above] a height position of the outer exhaust port at a side wall of the outer container; Igarashi (284b) does not disclose, although Igarashi (284a) teaches: the supply ports of the inert gas are at the same height (see figure 6) as the as the outer exhaust port (for the purpose of for example efficient fluid flow exhaustion);
and accordingly it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to provide the Igarashi inert gas supply port at the closer cylindrical location as taught via the Igarashi lower supply port (284a) at a height equal to the outer exhaust port, all for the purpose of for example efficient fluid flow exhaustion.
Igarashi discloses in claim 3: The substrate processing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the gas supply port is provided at a height position which is different from a height position of the inner exhaust port at a side wall of the outer container (as shown, the port 284b figure 7 extends to the upper region (at 283b) away from the lower region of 252 figure 5.)
Igarashi discloses in claim 5: The substrate processing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the gas supply port is provided such that the inert gas is supplied toward [an upper wall] of the inner container(figure 7); Igarashi does not disclose, although Okajima teaches: the inert gas is supplied toward the side wall of the inner container (via ports at 234f,g figure 12 where the ports are arranged vertically along the tube to provide for directional inert exhaust gas flow in the exhaust space and towards both the outer exhaust port 231 and the inner container 12, all for the purpose of efficient fluid flow exhaust);
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to provide Igarashi as taught in Okajima with the inert gas being supplied toward the side wall of the inner container as taught in Okajima via ports arranged vertically along the tube as taught in Okajima so as to provide for directional inert exhaust gas flow in the exhaust space and towards both the outer exhaust port and the inner container as taught in Okajima and all for the purpose of efficient fluid flow exhaust.
Igarashi discloses in claim 6: The substrate processing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the gas supply port is provided such that the inert gas is supplied in a direction (vertically) away from the inner exhaust port and (over the wall 282 and…) toward the outer exhaust port in the circumferential direction (as shown by flow path of 286b figure 6).
Igarashi discloses in claim 7: The substrate processing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the outer exhaust port (278) is provided at a position spaced apart from the inner exhaust port by 90 degrees or more in the circumferential direction (taken in the clockwise or counter clockwise direction.)
Igarashi discloses in claim 8: The substrate processing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the process chamber is configured to be capable of accommodating a plurality of substrates (vertical array of W) including the substrate such that the plurality of substrates are arranged in a direction perpendicular to surfaces (horizontal axis) of the substrates, and wherein the inner exhaust port (252 as seen in figure 5) is provided at the side wall of the inner container such that the inner exhaust port extends along an arrangement direction (vertical direction) of the plurality of substrates (as shown.)
Igarashi discloses in claim 9: The substrate processing apparatus of claim 8, but does not disclose, although Horita teaches: the inert gas supply system includes a nozzle extending in the arrangement direction of the plurality of substrates (249c,e figure 6, where each are arranged to span the vertical direction), and wherein a plurality of gas supply ports (250c,e) including the gas supply port, or (the use of “or” indicating an alternative grouping under MPEP 2131) a slit-shaped gas supply port formed to extend in an extension direction of the nozzle, is provided at a side surface of the nozzle (all provided for the purpose of maintaining adequate fluid gas dispersion.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to provide Igaraish as taught in Horita with the inert gas supply system having a nozzle extending in the arrangement direction of the plurality of substrates as taught in Horita where each can be arranged to span the vertical direction, and wherein a plurality of gas supply ports as taught in Horita including the gas supply port, and is provided at a side surface of the nozzle as taught in Horita and all provided for the purpose of maintaining adequate fluid gas dispersion.
Igarashi discloses in claim 12: The substrate processing apparatus of claim 1, further comprising: a controller (277/278) configured to be capable of controlling the first processing gas supply system ( via operable control of 278 MFC’s) and the inert gas supply system to perform: (a) supplying the first processing gas into the inner container; and (b) supplying the inert gas from the gas supply port during an execution period of (a, as necessarily the case).
Igarashi discloses in claim 13: The substrate processing apparatus of claim 12, wherein the controller is configured to be capable of controlling, in (b), the inert gas supply system to start supplying the inert gas after starting the supply of the first processing gas in (a) (ph 0062-0077.)
Igarashi discloses in claim 14: The substrate processing apparatus of claim 12, wherein the controller is configured to be capable of controlling, in (b), the inert gas supply system to stop the supply of the inert gas or reduce a supply flow rate of the inert gas when a pressure inside the inner container or at the outer exhaust port reaches a predetermined pressure (ph 0062-0077.)
Igarashi discloses in claim 15: The substrate processing apparatus of claim 12, further comprising: an exhaust system (241/280/279/278) connected to the outer exhaust port and configured to exhaust an inside of the outer container (via vacuum pump 279), wherein the controller is configured to be capable of controlling the exhaust system to stop exhausting the inside of the outer container (ph 0063-0072) at a time of starting the supply of the first processing gas in (a)
Igarashi discloses in claim 16: The substrate processing apparatus of claim 15, wherein the controller is configured to be capable of controlling, in (a), the first processing gas supply system to stop the supply of the first processing gas or reduce a supply flow rate of the first processing gas (via the MFC’s), according to a timing when a pressure inside the inner container or at the outer exhaust port reaches a predetermined pressure (based on the program and control sequence in ph 0075-0077.)
Igarashi discloses in claim 17: The substrate processing apparatus of claim 12, further comprising: a second processing gas supply system (another of 276b/277b/278b ph 0062) configured to supply a second processing gas (as discussed) into the inner container, wherein the controller (MFC) is configured to be capable of controlling the first processing gas supply system, the second processing gas supply system, and the inert gas supply system to perform a cycle (per ph 0075-0077) including (a), (b), (as discussed above in claim 12) and (c) supplying the second processing gas into the inner container a predetermined number of times such that (as discussed above in claim 12, ph 0076), in (b), the inert gas is not supplied during an execution period of (c) in the cycle (as necessary during the ph 0076 cycles.)
Igarashi discloses in claim 18: The substrate processing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first processing gas is a precursor gas (raw gas ph 0076) but Igarashi does not disclose, although Noda teaches: the precursor gas containing at least one amino group and a predetermined element in one molecule (ph 0264 where such a precursor gas is beneficial for reducing C derived from the precursor gas being introduced into the filmed to be formed, all for the ostensible purpose of improved formation purity.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to provide Igarashi as taught in Noda with the precursor gas containing at least one amino group and a predetermined element in one molecule as taught in Noda, where such a precursor gas is beneficial for reducing C derived from the precursor gas being introduced into the filmed to be formed, all for the ostensible purpose of improved formation purity.
Igarashi discloses in claim 19: [An apparatus formed via…] [a] method of manufacturing a semiconductor device (see abstract and figures 1 and 2), comprising: accommodating a substrate (200) in a process chamber, which is formed in an inner container (204) and configured to accommodate the substrate, of a substrate processing apparatus (of figure 1 and 2) including the inner container, an outer container (203) configured to surround a side wall of the inner container to provide an exhaust space between the inner container and the outer container, an inner exhaust port (204c) provided at the side wall of the inner container such that the inner exhaust port is provided at a position facing an arrangement region of the substrate in the process chamber (204c faces 200 as seen in figure 1), and an outer exhaust port (231) provided at the outer container at a position different from the position of the inner exhaust port in a circumferential direction of the side wall of the inner container (per angle theta figure 2); supplying a first processing gas (via one of 241a,b,f,g,h, ph 0036, 0040) into the inner container; and supplying an inert gas (via 241c,e ph 0036) to the exhaust space from a position between the inner exhaust port and the outer exhaust port (via 204c) in the circumferential direction (the port position is located circumferentially between the exhaust ports as discussed in claim 1.)
Igarashi discloses in claim 20: A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a program (see claim 18, preamble) that causes, by a computer, a substrate processing apparatus (figures 1 and 2) to perform a process comprising: accommodating a substrate (200) in a process chamber, which is formed in an inner container (204) and configured to accommodate the substrate, of the substrate processing apparatus including the inner container, an outer container (203) configured to surround a side wall (as shown) of the inner container to provide an exhaust space between the inner container and the outer container, an inner exhaust port (204c) provided at the side wall of the inner container such that the inner exhaust port is provided at a position facing an arrangement region of the substrate in the process chamber (204c faces 200 figure 1), and an outer exhaust port (231) provided at the outer container such that the outer exhaust port is provided at a position (angularly different via theta angle) different from the position of the inner exhaust port in a circumferential direction of the side wall of the inner container; supplying a first processing gas (via one of 241a,b,f,g,h, ph 0036, 0040) into the inner container; and supplying an inert gas (via 241c,e ph 0036) to the exhaust space from a position between the inner exhaust port and the outer exhaust port (via 204c) in the circumferential direction (the port position is located circumferentially between the exhaust ports as discussed in claim 1.)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10 and 11 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: the prior art fails to disclose or render obvious in claims 10/11 the following: “the plurality of gas supply ports, or the slit-shaped gas supply ports, is provided such that the inert gas is supplied in a direction away from the inner/outer exhaust port and toward the outer/inner exhaust port in the circumferential direction” as applied to each of claims 10 and 11 and in combination with the other limitations set forth above.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW W JELLETT, whose telephone number is 571-270-7497. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (9:30AM-6:00PM EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisors can be reached by phone. Ken Rinehart can be reached at (571)-272-4881, or Craig Schneider can be reached at (571) 272-3607. 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.
/Matthew W Jellett/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights