DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to Applicant’s reply filed 7/29/2026.
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.
Claim Status
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 7-9 and 17-18 are withdrawn.
Claims 1-6, 10-16, and 19-20 have been examined herein on the merits.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species A (Fig. 2) in the reply filed on 7/29/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Species A-F depict “alternative implementations”, not independent inventions.
This is not found persuasive because the examiner considers the alleged “alternative implementations” to be mutually exclusive embodiments, and thus must be independent inventions. Put simply, “alternative implementations” is regarded as substantially the same as “independent inventions”.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 10 and 19 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.
Regarding claims 10 and 19, the limitation: “wherein the light source is parallel light” is regarded as indefinite claim language. Particularly, it is unclear how a light source can be the light itself, rather than simply providing said light.
In the interest of compact and expedited prosecution, the Examiner interprets the claim as reading: “wherein the light is parallel”.
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 1-6, 10, 12-16, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (US Pub. 2022/0084838) in view of Bus-Kwoffie (US Patent 6,051,099), with Morimoto (US Pub. 2004/0008980) as an evidentiary reference for claims 4 and 15.
Regarding claims 1 and 12, Zhang teaches a film growth process equipment (Fig. 1, entirety), comprising: a main chamber ([0051] and Fig. 1, chamber #108); an illumination device ([0051] and Fig. 1, RTP system #106) for film growth process ([0050]), comprising: a light source ([0053] and Fig. 1, flash lamps #128); a transparent layer ([0053] and Fig. 1, window #138), wherein the transparent layer comprises a light-emitting surface away from the light source ([0053]: comprises sapphire, thus is transparent to a variety of wavelengths of light; bottom surface of #138).
Zhang does not teach a van der Waals material layer, disposed on the light-emitting surface of the transparent layer.
However, Bus-Kwoffie teaches a boron nitride coating on a chamber surface (Bus-Kwoffie – C3, L67 - C4, L3).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to coat any and all surfaces (including the light-emitting surface) of the Zhang apparatus with a boron nitride coating in order to minimize contamination during processing (Bus-Kwoffie – C3, L67 - C4, L3).
The limitation: “wherein the van der Waals material layer is formed as a portion of an inner surface of the main chamber” is met by the combination of references due to the location teachings of Bus-Kwoffie.
Regarding claims 2 and 13, Zhang does not teach the added limitations of the claim.
However, Bus-Kwoffie teaches wherein the van der Waals material layer is a single layer or a plurality of layers, and comprises boron nitride (Bus-Kwoffie – C3, L67 - C4, L3).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to coat any and all surfaces (including the light-emitting surface) of the Zhang apparatus with a boron nitride coating in order to minimize contamination during processing (Bus-Kwoffie – C3, L67 - C4, L3).
Regarding claims 3 and 14, Zhang teaches wherein the film growth process/equipment comprises an atomic layer deposition (ALD) process/equipment and a physical vapor deposition (PVD) process/equipment (Zhang – [0184]).
Regarding claims 4 and 15, Zhang teaches wherein the light source comprises a lamp (Zhang – [0053] and Fig. 1, flash lamp #128).
While Zhang does not explicitly describe the material nature of the lamp (i.e., as containing xenon, krypton, mercury vapor, metal-halide, or deuterium), the Examiner respectfully submits that these are common materials for lamps in RTP systems such that Zhang inherently teaches this feature. As evidence of this inherency, the Examiner submits Morimoto (par. [0047]).
Regarding claims 5 and 20, Zhang teaches wherein the light source is arranged in an array (see Fig. 1, plurality of #128) and provides intermittent pulse irradiation (Zhang – [0057]).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, Zhang teaches a light reflective layer ([0053] and Fig. 1, reflector #142 with parabolic reflective portions #144), wherein the light source is disposed between the light reflective layer and the transparent layer (Fig. 1: #128 disposed between #144 and #138), and the light reflective layer has a reflective surface facing the light source (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claims 10 and 19, Zhang teaches wherein the light is parallel when reaching the transparent layer (see Fig. 1, where plurality of parabolic reflectors #144 would direct the light downward towards #112 in substantially parallel directions).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (US Pub. 2022/0084838) in view of Bus-Kwoffie (US Patent 6,051,099), as applied to claims 1-6, 10, 12-16, and 19-20 above, and further in view of Grill (US Pub. 2015/0191824).
The limitations of claims 1-6, 10, 12-16, and 19-20 are set forth above.
Regarding claim 11, modified Zhang does not teach the added limitations of the claim.
However, Grill teaches a light shielding plate (Grill – [0061] and Fig. 2, shutter #730 covering window #720).
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 Zhang apparatus with the light shielding plate of Grill in order to protect and cover the optical window when the radiation source is not operating (Grill – [0061]).
For clarity, the limitation: “wherein after a light beam generated by the light source passes through the van der Waals material layer, a passage of the light beam is controlled by controlling the light shielding plate” is met by the combination of references above, which would be capable of operating in this manner by virtue of the disclosed structures therein.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Chen (US Patent 5,234,526) teaches a transparent window with interior coating (Fig. 6b). Kusada (US Pub. 2004/0018751) teaches a movable cover plate between lamps and a window (Fig. 1). Ranish (US Pub. 2009/0255921) teaches an RTP apparatus with coated window (Fig. 1).
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
Prosecution Insights