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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicants’ submission, filed on 05/22/2025, in response to claims 1-11 and 14 rejection from the non-final office action (03/11/2026), by amending claims 1-4 and 11-12 is entered and will be addressed below.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 12-13 remain withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Invention Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: Line II-II’ is not shown in Fig. 9.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretations
The previously added “a connection electrode layer” of claim 1, Applicants’ Specification describes the connection electrode layer 140 connecting the first electrodes 131 and the second electrodes 132 of the ESC, therefore, the a connection electrode layers is a portion of the ESC electrode.
For the newly added limitations “wherein the connection electrode layer terminates at an area between two adjacent indentations of the indentations”, as the connection electrode can be any portion of the ESC electrode, the end points of the connection electrode can be arbitrarily chosen, therefore, a continuous ESC electrode passing through the indentation(s) can be considered read into this portion of claim 1.
The “a vacuum chamber in which an etching process is performed on a target substrate having at least one processing area” of claim 1, a processing area, with broadest reasonable interpretation, can be of any size, includes area shined by the laser and area not exposed to the laser. A processing area may be the entire substrate or a portion of the substrate.
The “An etching apparatus for making a substrate of a display device”, an apparatus that is capable of etching by feed appropriate gases and is capable of processing a display device is considered read into the claim.
The “a vacuum chamber in which an etching process is performed on a target substrate having at least one processing area” of claim 1 and “the target substrate comprises a plurality of unit cells, and each of the unit cells includes at least one processing area” of claim 6, as the substrate used in the apparatus is an intended use of the apparatus, not part of the apparatus, the features on the substrate is also not part of the apparatus.
The “wherein the target substrate contacts the base area of the chuck and is spaced apart from the indentations” of claim 2, the size of the substrate is also considered an intended use of the apparatus, as such as smaller substrate does not in contact the entire area of the chuck.
It has been held that claim language that simply specifies an intended use or field of use for the invention generally will not limit the scope of a claim (Walter, 618 F.2d at 769, 205 USPQ at 409; MPEP 2106). Additionally, in apparatus claims, intended use must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim (In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); MPEP2111.02). When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent (In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977); MPEP 2112.01).
Furthermore, the limitations of amended claim 6: “wherein the at least one processing area comprises a plurality of processing areas,
wherein the target substrate comprises a plurality of unit cells, and
wherein each of the unit cells includes at least one of the plurality of processing areas”, the processing areas may or may not be the same as the areas (or HMa and HMb). And as the substrate is not part of the apparatus, the unit cells is not part of the apparatus, and “includes at least one of the plurality of processing areas” can be met by defining the processing areas of the target substrate. Note also includes does not need to be aligned as disclosed in the Specification ([0130]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The ”wherein the first dielectric layer, the electrode layer, and the second dielectric layer expose at least a part of the indentations” of claim 4 is a feature of any of Fig. 10, 12-15. The previously added limitations “wherein the chuck further comprises a connection electrode layer which comprises a portion extending from the first base area of the first surface of the chuck to the inner side surfaces inclined with respect to the first base area of the first surface of the chuck“ of claim 1 is a feature of Fig. 11, which shows the indentations are not exposed. There is no description how Fig. 11 can be modified to expose at least a part of the indentations.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 2 and 4 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.
The ”wherein the first dielectric layer, the electrode layer, and the second dielectric layer expose at least a part of the indentations” of claim 4 contradicts the previously added limitations “wherein the chuck further comprises a connection electrode layer which comprises a portion extending from the first base area of the first surface of the chuck to the inner side surfaces inclined with respect to the first base area of the first surface of the chuck“ of claim 1 plus the limitation “a base substrate including the first surface including the base area and the indentations; a first dielectric layer disposed on the first surface of the base substrate; an electrode layer disposed on the first dielectric layer; and a second dielectric layer disposed on the electrode layer” which means the indentation(s) is/are not exposed (please note layer by layer coverage). It is not clear how the indentations can be exposed (in claims 4-5) with these overlayers covering it (in claim 3).
Claim 4 will be examined inclusive either as indentation(s) being covered or exposed.
The newly amendment claim 2 “wherein the target substrate contacts the base area of the chuck and is spaced apart from the indentations”, indentation(s) is a space. Fig. 5 shows the target substrate is right new to indentation (HM) and is not spaced apart from HM.
Claim 2 will be examined inclusive the target substrate next to the indentation(s).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3, 6, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon (KR 20060004036, hereafter ‘036), in view of Paeng et al. (US 20210143032, hereafter ‘032).
‘036 teaches some limitations of:
Claim 1: equipment for deposition and etching processes in the manufacturing process of semiconductors and LCDs includes an electrostatic chuck to hold the wafer in place in the chamber … the deposition process is a chemical vapor deposition deposit (CVD) process in the semiconductor process through the chemical vapor deposition in the chamber in the vacuum (top of P2, includes the claimed “An etching apparatus for making a substrate of a display device, the apparatus comprising: a vacuum chamber in which an etching process is performed on a target substrate having at least one processing area; a chuck disposed inside the vacuum chamber to support and fix the target substrate onto a first surface thereof”, note any part of the substrate, large or small, can be considered as a “processing area”);
The second embodiment of the present invention has the same point of forming the depressions 28 as in the first embodiment, but differs in the structure for forming the depressions 28. That is, the recessed portion 28 is formed on the upper surface of the dielectric film 16 by recessing only the dielectric film 16 positioned at the top layer around the power supply hole 18 to a predetermined area and depth (lower portion of P5, “wherein the first surface of the chuck includes: a base area, and indentations recessed from the base area in a thickness direction of the chuck, wherein at least a part of the indentations overlaps the processing area of the target substrate, wherein the chuck comprises a second surface opposite the first surface, wherein the indentations are not connected to any hole extending through the second surface, wherein inner side surfaces of the indentations are inclined with respect to the base area of the first surface of the chuck“, as shown in Fig. 1, 3, or 4. Fig. 5 shows the depression are not connected to helium passages 20),
The power supply line 22 is inherently connected to the conductive film 14 so as to provide a high voltage (middle of P2, the conductive film 14 is the ESC electrode, includes the claimed “wherein the chuck further comprises a connection electrode layer which comprises a portion extending from the first base area of the first surface of the chuck to the inner side surfaces inclined with respect to the first base area of the first surface of the chuck, and wherein the connection electrode layer terminates at an area between two adjacent indentations of the indentations“, the middle portion of the conductive film, includes the inclined surface, the bottom horizontal portion, and some of the upper horizontal portion, is considered “a connection electrode layer … terminates at an area between two adjacent indentations of the indentations”, see illustration below).
PNG
media_image1.png
372
654
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (connection
electrode
ends between
two indentations)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (electrode
layer)]
‘036 does not teach the other limitations of:
Claim 1: a laser module disposed outside the vacuum chamber to irradiate a laser beam onto the processing area of the target substrate.
‘032 is analogous art in the field of ATOMIC LAYER ETCH AND DEPOSITION PROCESSING SYSTEMS (title), the substrate support 110 includes an electrostatic chuck or vacuum chuck (Fig. 1 or 2, [0061], 4th last sentence). ’032 teaches that a substrate processing system 200 incorporating a RTP system 202 including a laser 204, a lens circuit 206 (Fig. 2, [0068]), FIG. 8 shows an example etch rate versus laser fluence plot for ALE performed ([0089]), If the light rays are directed in a direction orthogonal to the image plane 304, then an ideal laser beam condition exists for etch rate uniformity across a surface of the substrate 112 ([0128], 5th 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 added a laser and a lens circuit of ‘032 to the embodiment Fig. 1, 3, or 4 of ‘036, for the purpose of controlled laser etching including uniform etch rate, as taught by ‘032 ([0128], 5th sentence).
‘036 further teaches the limitations of:
Claim 2: The areas within depressions 28 of ‘036 do not contact the wafer 26, includes the claimed “wherein the target substrate contacts the base area of the chuck and is spaced apart from the indentations”.
Claim 3: the electrostatic chuck 100 has a structure in which the insulating film 12, the conductive film 14, and the dielectric film 16 are sequentially stacked from the bottom to the aluminum substrate 10 as a base plate (bottom portion of P4, includes the claimed “wherein the chuck is an electrostatic chuck including: a base substrate including the first surface including the base area and the indentations; a first dielectric layer disposed on the first surface of the base substrate; an electrode layer disposed on the first dielectric layer; and a second dielectric layer disposed on the electrode layer, and wherein the connection electrode layer is disposed on the first dielectric layer and the connection electrode layer is disposed on the electrode layer”).
Claim 6: as the substrate is not part of the apparatus, furthermore, one can designated various portions of the substrate as unit cells and corresponding processing area, it reads into the claimed “wherein the at least one processing area comprises a plurality of processing areas, wherein the target substrate comprises a plurality of unit cells, and wherein each of the unit cells includes at least one of the plurality of processing areas”.
Claim 14: as the entire substrate is the processing area, it reads into the claimed “A system comprising: the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the chuck unit is configured to support the target substrate such that an entirety of the processing area of the target substrate overlaps the indentations” or by using a very large substrate.
Claims 4-5 and 7-11, and alternatively claims 1-3, 6, and 14, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘036 and ‘032, as being applied to claim 1 rejection above, further in view of Hashizume et al. (US 20110011514, hereafter ‘514).
The combination of ‘036 and ‘032 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 4: wherein the first dielectric layer, the electrode layer, and the second dielectric layer expose at least a part of the indentations.
Claim 7: wherein the indentations comprise grooves formed in a generally lattice shape.
Claim 8: wherein the grooves comprise a first groove extending in a first direction and a second groove extending in a second direction intersecting the first direction.
Claim 9: wherein the first groove comprises a plurality of first grooves along the second direction, the second groove comprises a plurality of second grooves along the first direction, and
wherein a first distance between the first grooves disposed adjacent to each other in the second direction is greater than a first width of each first groove in the second direction, and a second distance between the second grooves disposed adjacent to each other in the first direction is greater than a second width of each second groove in the first direction.
Claim 10: wherein the grooves comprise a plurality of first grooves arranged along a first direction and spaced apart from each other and a plurality of second grooves arranged along a second direction intersecting the first direction and spaced apart from each other.
‘514 is analogous art in the field of APPARATUS FOR MANUFACTURING BONDED SUBSTRATE (title), liquid crystal displays (LCDs) ([0002]), a bonded substrate holds each substrate 11, 16 with a vacuum chuck, an electrostatic chuck, or a mechanical chuck ([0011]), FIG. 13A is a block diagram schematically showing the electric circuit of the upper electrostatic chuck 76a. The upper electrostatic chuck 76a includes a plurality of dielectric layers that are applied on the upper holding plate 75a. In this embodiment, the upper electrostatic chuck 76a has four dielectric layers, or first, second, third, and fourth dielectric layers 91a, 91b, 91c, 91d. First, second, third, and fourth electrodes 92a, 92b, 92c, 92d are embedded in the first to fourth dielectric layers 91a-91d, respectively ([0137], same layer structure as ‘036). ’514 teaches that An upper attraction line 77a is formed in the upper chuck unit 72a for attracting the second substrate W2 through vacuum (using a difference in pressure). The upper attraction line 77a includes a plurality of upper attraction holes, an upper horizontal passage, and a plurality of upper discharge passages ([0122], 2nd sentence, 12B shows the attraction lines 77A penetrates the base layer), As shown in FIGS. 12A and 12B, a plurality of attraction grooves 89 are formed in the attraction side of the upper electrostatic chuck 76a. The position of each attraction groove 89 corresponds to the second substrate W2 when the upper electrostatic chuck 76a attracts the substrate W2 ([0131]).
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 vertical attraction line 77a of ‘514 penetrating to base layer of ‘036 and to have changed the shape of the depressions 28 of ‘036 to lattice from top view, as taught by ‘514, for the purpose of more chucking capability.
‘514 further teaches the limitations of:
Claim 5: Fig. 13A shows the claimed “wherein the electrode layer comprises a first electrode and a second electrode spaced apart from the first electrode, the first electrode and the second electrode being electrically insulated from each other”.
The combination of ‘036 and ‘032 further teaches the limitations of:
Claim 11: A beam size adjustment device 226 may be disposed between the beam shaping optics 212 and the first mirror 214 (‘032, [0071], is capable being adjusted to be smaller than depressions 28 of ‘036, includes the claimed “wherein a width of each groove is greater than a width of the processing area”).
Applicants argue that ‘036 teaches a single depression 28 and does not reads into claim 1. While the examiner disagrees, it is noted that ‘514 teaches a plurality of grooves/depressions. Furthermore, the conductive film 14 of ‘036 is a monopolar one piece film while ‘514 teaches bipolar multiple-piece electrodes 92a-92d. Therefore, there are multiple hot spots, therefore, more reason to duplicate depressions 28 to reduce rise of temperature at these hot spots.
Claims 2-3, 6, and 14 rejections are discussed above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In regarding to 35 USC 112(a) and 112(b) rejection of claims 4-5, Applicants argue that Fig. 10 is taken along line II-II′ of FIG. 9 and Fig. 11 taken along line III-III′ of FIG. 9, see page 7 to the middle of page 9.
This argument is found not persuasive.
Fig. 9 does not show line II-II′. It appears Fig. 10 is a different portion of Fig. 9 than Fig. 11. If and when Applicants submit replacement drawing, please also considered consistency between claim 3 (appears to be feature of Fig. 10) and the claim 4 (appears to be feature of Fig. 11) being dependent on claim 3.
The 112(a) and 112(b) rejection of claim 5 has been withdrawn.
In regarding to 35 USC 103 rejection over Jeon ‘036 and Paeng ‘032, Applicants argue that ‘036 teaches a single depression 28, because it is for temperature rise around the power supply hole, see the middle of page 10.
This argument is found not persuasive.
‘036 stated that “forming the depressions 28” (P5, 3 last complete paragraph, which is in the original Korean disclosure 28들 means plural depressions 28). It is well-known that there can be multiple power lines to the chuck.
It has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Because of this argument, the examiner adds rejection further in view of ‘514, as discussed above. In short, by using bipolar ESC instead of uniform conductive film 14 in ‘036, the multiple hot spots requires multiple depressions. ‘331 in the conclusion also teaches bipolar ESC.
Still furthermore, previous cited reference, for example, US 8848334, teaches multiple channels/depressions 121 not connected to cooling gas inlets 601 (Fig. 7).
By the way, if applicants want to quote prior art with their own translation, please provide a translation and pointing to the location from the quote. Otherwise, please use the translation on the record.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 5748434 is cited for lattice like gap 100 on the chuck 4 (Fig. 2).
The examiner notices the previously submitted IDS US 8848334 teaches channels 121/grooves (Fig. 7), is also applicable to the rejection.
TW 201324673 is cited for the shape of grooves 111 over ESC electrode 323 (Fig. 4). KR 20220015009 is cited for lattice like groove 102 from top view (Fig. 2) and cross-sectional shape of groove 32 from side view and conformal ESC electrode 20 (Fig. 3). US 5745331 is cited for conformal ESC electrode (Fig. 2a).
US 20100013058 is cited for exhaust tube 46 at lateral side of pedestal 43 (Fig. 7).
US 20150348752 is cited for laser etching beam size 0.5 µm ([0024]). The examiner notices Applicants’ IDS, KR 101761585 (Fig. 3) and KR 101906288 (Fig. 1) each teaches laser outside the vacuum chamber.
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 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