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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/26/2024 and 8/11/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omori et.al. (US-2014/0216332-A1, hereinafter Omori), and further in view of Breninger et.al. (US-2018/0090363-A1, hereinafter Breninger)
Regarding Claim 1.
PNG
media_image1.png
547
617
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Omori teaches A lift pin (#27) for a processing chamber (#11), comprising:
a rod comprising a shaft section (#45) and a head section (#47), and
a pad (#41+#26) sized and shaped to fit at least partially around the head section (#47) of the rod such that the head section of the rod is movable relative to the pad within a movement range. (lid member #26 having a downward-protruding, hollow tube portion #41, receives the swelling portion #47, which slides axially within the tube portion; a clearance/gap permits relative up-and-down movement between the pin and the lid member [0041-0055])
Omori does not explicitly disclose the head section of the lift pin comprising an opening formed in an outer edge of the head section and extending radially inwardly;
However, Breninger teaches the head section comprising an opening (#144 Fig.3 & 7) formed in an outer edge of the head section and extending radially inwardly; (Fig.2-7 [0022-0030])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Omori’s device with the teachings of Breninger, as identified above, so that the head section could cooperate with the surrounding lid/tube/pad structure for retention while still permitting controlled relative movement. The modification would have been a predictable use of a known lift-pin retention feature in a similar semiconductor substrate processing environment.
Regarding Claim 2.
Omori modified by Breninger teaches The lift pin of claim 1,
Omori further teaches that the swelling portion #47 (head) of lift pin #27 contacts buffer member #44 of lid member #26 in one position, and when the lifting pin moves downward to a lower position from that contact state, the lifting pin separates from the buffer member. Thus the contact area between the swelling/head portion and the lid/pad is reduced in the lower position, including being reduced to no contact. Therefore Omori teaches wherein a contact area between the head section and the pad is reduced in a lower position of the movement range than in an upper position of the movement range.
Regarding Claim 5.
Omori modified by Breninger teaches The lift pin of claim 1,
Omori further teaches wherein the pad (#41+#26) comprises:
a head section (#26 lid member); and
a sleeve section extending relative to a side of the head section, the sleeve section comprising a pad opening.(tube portion #41 is hollow in its interior with a small bottom hole through which the shaft passes [0043-0050])
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omori et.al. (US-2014/0216332-A1, hereinafter Omori), in view of Breninger et.al. (US-2018/0090363-A1, hereinafter Breninger), further in view of Fondurulia et.al. (US- 20060156981A1, hereinafter Fondurulia)
Regarding Claim 3.
Omori modified by Breninger teaches The lift pin of claim 1,
Omori modified by Breninger does not explicitly disclose wherein the opening includes a slot extending into an end face of the head section of the rod.
However, Fondurulia teaches a semiconductor wafer support pin assembly including upper and lower pin portions that engage by a quick-release bayonet mount. Fondurulia teaches that the upper pin has a connector #125 configured to engage with a slot #127 and groove #129 in the lower pin, and that the components are pushed together and rotated to lock the connector in the groove.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Omori and Breninger with the teachings of Fondurulia, as identified above, because such a slot/protrusion quick-release engagement was known in semiconductor support-pin assemblies and predictably facilitates assembly, replacement, and retention of support/life-pin components without threaded interfaces. Fondurulia expressly teaches that the quick-release bayonet mechanism simplifies installation and replacement and reduces undesirable particle generation.
Regarding Claim 4.
Omori modified by Breninger and Fondurulia teaches The lift pin of claim 3,
Fondurulia further teaches a complementary protrusion/slot quick-release engagement between two support-pin components. In particular, Fondurulia teaches that the upper pin #122 has a connector #125 configured to engage with slot #127 and groove #129 of lower pin #124, and that after insertion and rotation, the connector is biased into the groove by a spring to maintain the upper and lower pins locked together, i.e. Fondurulia teaches wherein the pad comprises a protrusion sized and shaped to protrude into the slot of the head section.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Omori, Breninger and Fondurulia with the teachings of Fondurulia, as identified above, in order to provide a quick-release keyed mechanical engagement between the pad and the rod. The reason to combine is to simplify assembly and replacement of the life-pin contact component, avoid threaded interfaces, reduce particle generation, and maintain secure retention during use.
Claims 10-11 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omori et.al. (US-2014/0216332-A1, hereinafter Omori), and further in view of Kato et. al. (US-20180171474A1, hereinafter Kato)
Regarding Claim 10.
Omori teaches A pad for a lift pin, the pad (#26+#41) comprising:
a head section (lid portion of #26), and
a sleeve section (#41) extending relative to the head section,
Omori does not explicitly disclose the sleeve section comprising a pad opening formed in an end face of the sleeve section, the pad opening extending radially inward into an outer face of the sleeve section.
However, Kato teaches a support pin for a film deposition device, including a head #30 and a support cylinder #20. Kato teaches that grooves #21 are formed in the support cylinder #20, that one end of each groove #21 is opened at an edge/upper end of the support cylinder, that the groove is substantially U-shaped, and that the groove penetrates that circumferential wall of the support cylinder in a radial direction. Kato further teaches that the insertion part of the head includes portions received in the grooves, and that this structure improves strength of the head and inhibits damage.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Omori with the teachings of Kato, as identified above, because the modification would have been a predictable use of a known support-pin sleeve opening structure.
Regarding Claim 11.
Omori modified by Kato teaches The pad of claim 10,
Omori further teaches wherein the pad opening comprises:
a first section (small hole next to #42) formed in the end face of the sleeve section;
a second section (portion pointed by #41) between the first section and the head section (#26 lid member) of the pad, the second section having a larger dimension than the first section. (Fig.2 [0039-0055])
Regarding Claim 13.
Omori modified by Kato teaches The pad of claim 11,
Kato further teaches groove #21 is opened at an edge/upper end of support cylinder #20 and penetrates the circumferential wall of the support cylinder in a radial direction. This teaches (wherein the first section includes) an outer portion extending through a wall of the sleeve section.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Omori and Kato with the teachings of Kato, as identified above, in order to improve the engagement and strength of the support pin.
Regarding Claim 14.
Omori modified by Kato teaches The pad of claim 10,
Omori further teaches wherein the pad comprises an opaque material. ([0036] the material of pad is aluminum which is opaque)
Claims 15, 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omori et.al. (US-2014/0216332-A1, hereinafter Omori), in view of Breninger et.al. (US-2018/0090363-A1, hereinafter Breninger), further in view of Fondurulia et.al. (US- 20060156981A1, hereinafter Fondurulia)
Regarding Claim 15.
Omori teaches A processing chamber (#11) applicable for use in semiconductor manufacturing, comprising:
a substrate (#31) support disposed in a processing volume of the processing chamber;
a plurality of lift pins (#27) disposed at least partially through the substrate support, at least one of the plurality of lift pins comprising:
a pad (#26+#41) comprising a pad opening formed in an end face of the pad, and
a rod (#45/#47) disposed at least partially in the pad opening of the pad, the rod comprising a shaft section (#45) and a head section (#47),
Omori does not explicitly disclose the head section comprising an opening formed in an outer edge and an end face of the head section.
However, Breninger teaches grooves (#138) arranged around a radially outer edge of the lift pin --- an opening in the outer edge extending radially inward (Breninger Fig.2-3)
Fondurulia further teaches a lift-pin member having a slot (#127) extending into its end face (bayonet mount receiving connector #125) (Fondurulia Figs 2-4)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Omori with the teachings of Breninger and Fondurulia, as identified above, in order to obtain the recognized benefits of captive retention and keyed, tool-less, demountable engagement of the rod within the pad while preserving the intended relative movement.
Regarding Claim 17.
Omori modified by Breninger and Fondurulia teaches The processing chamber of claim 15,
Omori further teaches wherein the head section (#47) of the rod is movable relative to the pad within a movement range along a longitudinal axis of the rod. ([0048-0055] Fig.2-3)
Regarding Claim 18.
Omori modified by Breninger and Fondurulia teaches The processing chamber of claim 17,
Fondurulia further teaches in Fig.1-3 coupled lift-pin members that are rotated between an unlocked (inserted) position and a locked position, spring-biased (#128) into the locked position against a groove (#129)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Omori, Breninger and Fondurulia with the teachings of Fondurulia, as identified above, in order to the demountable, tool-less, positively-retained coupling taught by Fondurulia. This yields predictable results, with a reasonable expectation of success. Therefore Omori with the teachings of Breninger and Fondurulia teaches wherein one or more of the pad or the rod are rotatable with respect to each other between an unlocked position and a locked position, and the one or more of the pad or the rod are rotatable in a plane oriented at an angle relative to the longitudinal axis.
Regarding Claim 19.
Omori modified by Breninger and Fondurulia teaches The processing chamber of claim 15,
Omori further teaches wherein the pad comprises:
a head section (#26); and
a sleeve section (#41) extending relative to the head section, wherein the pad opening is formed in the sleeve section. ([0041-0050] Fig.2-3)
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omori et.al. (US-2014/0216332-A1, hereinafter Omori), in view of Breninger et.al. (US-2018/0090363-A1, hereinafter Breninger), further in view of Fondurulia et.al. (US- 20060156981A1, hereinafter Fondurulia) and Rokkam et. al. (US-20190229008A1, hereinafter Rokkam)
Regarding Claim 16.
Omori modified by Breninger and Fondurulia teaches The processing chamber of claim 15,
Omori teaches wherein the substrate support comprises an outer surface formed of an opaque material, the pad comprises an outer surface formed of the opaque material, ([0077] placement table #21 and lid member #26 are formed of aluminum—an opaque material)
Omori modified by Breninger and Fondurulia does not explicitly disclose the rod is formed of a transparent material.
However, Rokkam teaches the rod is formed of a transparent material. (Rokkam summary and [0008])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Omori, Breninger and Fondurulia with the teachings of Rokkam, as identified above, in order to allow radiant transfer through the rod and reduce the pin’s thermal shadow, thereby improving substrate thermal uniformity.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-9, 12 and 20 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:
Claim 6 contains allowable subject matter, because the prior art, either singly or in combination, fails to anticipate or render obvious, the device, wherein …the second section having a larger dimension than the first section, wherein the head section of the rod is sized and shaped to slide into the second section of the pad opening; and
the pad comprises a protrusion extending into the second section to define an annular channel at least partially about the protrusion. These features in combination with the other elements of the claim are neither disclosed nor suggested by the prior art of record.
Claim 7 contains allowable subject matter, because the prior art, either singly or in combination, fails to anticipate or render obvious, the device, wherein … the pad comprises a protrusion extending into a pad opening of the sleeve section to define an annular channel at least partially about the protrusion; and the head section of the rod comprises a tapered outer surface sized and shaped to interface with an inner surface of the sleeve section. These features in combination with the other elements of the claim are neither disclosed nor suggested by the prior art of record.
Claims 8-9 contain allowable subject matter because they depend from claim 7.
Claim 12 contains allowable subject matter, because the prior art, either singly or in combination, fails to anticipate or render obvious, the device, wherein … the pad further comprises a protrusion extending into the second section to define an annular channel at least partially about the protrusion. These features in combination with the other elements of the claim are neither disclosed nor suggested by the prior art of record.
Claim 20 contains allowable subject matter, because the prior art, either singly or in combination, fails to anticipate or render obvious, the device, wherein … the second section having a larger dimension than the first section; and the pad comprises a protrusion extending into the second section to define an annular channel at least partially about the protrusion. These features in combination with the other elements of the claim are neither disclosed nor suggested by the prior art of record.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SOPHIA W KAO whose telephone number is (703)756-4797. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm Pacific Time.
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, Eliseo Ramos-Feliciano can be reached at (571) 272-7925. 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.
/SOPHIA W KAO/Examiner, Art Unit 2817
/ELISEO RAMOS FELICIANO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2817
Prosecution Insights