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 .
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(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2017/0069519 to Shiraiwa.
Claim 1: Shiraiwa discloses a substrate processing method, comprising: providing a baseplate (20 [base plate], Fig. 1A-1B); arranging a ceramic layer (41 [chuck plate body], para. [0024]) above the baseplate (41); arranging an edge ring (52 [projection] of 50 [focus ring]) arranged around an outer perimeter of the ceramic layer (41), wherein an outer radius of the ceramic layer (outer radius of 41) is greater than an inner radius of the edge ring (inner radius of 52), such that an outer edge of an uppermost surface of the ceramic layer extends below the edge ring (Fig. 1A);
wherein the ceramic layer includes (i) an annular groove (41X [groove]) arranged in the uppermost surface of the ceramic layer and (ii) an insert (60 [protective layer], para. [0056]) arranged in the annular groove (41X); arranging a substrate (W [substrate]) on the ceramic layer (41, Fig. 1A); and performing at least one processing step on the substrate (para. [0037], [0054]).
Claim 2: The apparatus of Shiraiwa discloses wherein the insert (60, Fig. 1A-1B, Shiraiwa) comprises ceramic (para. [0037]).
Claim 3: The apparatus of Shiraiwa discloses wherein the insert (60, Fig. 1A-1B, Shiraiwa) is positioned at least partially below the edge ring (52, see fig. 1B).
Claim 4: The apparatus of Shiraiwa discloses wherein, when the substrate (W, Fig. 1A-1B, Shiraiwa) is arranged on the ceramic layer (41), the insert (60) extends below the substrate (W, Fig. 1B).
Claim 5: The apparatus of Shiraiwa discloses wherein the substrate is a 300 mm substrate (W, see para. [0026], and wherein the ceramic layer (41) has an outer radius of at least 151.5 mm (see para. [0026] where 41 has a diameter of 100 mm to about 450 mm in which the claimed measurement falls).
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.
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 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shiraiwa as applied to claims 1-5 above, and in view of US 2010/0163188 to Tanaka.
Claims 6-7: The apparatus of Shiraiwa does not disclose (claim 6) wherein the substrate is a 450 mm substrate, and wherein the ceramic layer has an outer radius of at least 226.5 mm; (claim 7) wherein the substrate has a diameter d mm, and wherein, when the substrate is arranged on the ceramic layer, (i) a manufacturing variance associated with the substrate is v mm, and (ii) the ceramic layer has an outer radius greater than or equal to a sum of (d + v)/2 and a predetermined offset.
However Tanaka discloses diameter of a substrate support (58 [mounting table], Fig. 1-4), is about 340 mm, 230mm, and 460 mm for the purpose of corresponding to a wafer having a diameter of about 300 mm, 200 mm, and 400 mm respectively (see para. [0080]) and/or providing a mounting table capable of suppressing generation of a thermal stress on the mounting table (see para. [0019]). It is noted that 460 mm is enough to support a substrate diameter being 450 mm.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the optimization of substrate support requirements as taught by Tanaka with motivation to correspond to a wafer having a diameter of about 300 mm, 200 mm, and 400 mm respectively and/or providing a mounting table capable of suppressing generation of a thermal stress on the mounting table.
Claim 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shiraiwa as applied to claims 1-5 above, and in view of US 20090159588 to Morioka.
Claim 8: The apparatus of Shiraiwa does not disclose wherein the insert includes one or more holes configured to facilitate attachment of the insert to the ceramic layer in the annular groove. Yet Shiraiwa teaches that the process of forming the protective layer is not limited to thermal spraying, and may be other ways (para. [0049]), which does not teach away from fastening.
Morioka teaches wherein a component (23 [fixture], Fig. 1) includes one or more holes (“bolt hole,” para. [0018]) configured to facilitate attachment of the component (23) to the ceramic component (11 [ceramic base]) in an annular groove (annular groove of 11/21), for the purpose of fixedly fastening the component to the ceramic component (para. [0018]). This is evidenced by Smathers which teaches that an insert may be snugly snap fit (a first securing means) or the like into the grooves, and additionally fasteners (a second securing means) such as bayonet mounts and slots and ball detents may be used for the purpose of promoting fastening the insert into the groove of the assembly.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the holes as taught by Morioka with motivation to fixedly fasten the component to the ceramic component, as evidenced by Smathers with motivation to promote fastening the insert into the groove.
Claim 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shiraiwa as applied to claims 1-5 above, and in view of US 20120168079 to Cheng.
Claim 9: The apparatus of Shiraiwa does not disclose wherein the ceramic layer includes one or more cutouts around an outer perimeter of the insert to facilitate removal of the insert from the annular groove.
Cheng teaches wherein a component (150 [carrier]) includes one or more cutouts (153 [notches], Fig, 4) around a perimeter of the opening (151 [opening) to facilitate removal of the part (wafer in this instance) from the component (150, para. [0033]) for the purpose of providing access to the part (wafer) to be lifted with fingers (para. [0033]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate concept of having cutouts at the perimeter as taught by Cheng with motivation to provide access to the part (wafer) to be lifted with fingers.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected independent claim, but would be allowable if rewritten into the independent claim(s) including all of the limitations of the independent claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 11223302 (Fig. 2-4), US 11168410 (Fig. 4-25), US 11069553 (Fig. 4), US 20020135969 (Fig. 5-13d), disclose inserts in a ceramic. US 5978202 (Fig. 2A-2D), US 5740009 (Fig. 2-7), US 20050105243 (fig, 6), US 20040134618 (fig. 2), discloses inserts in a baseplate.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Charlee J. C. Bennett whose telephone number is (571)270-7972. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10am-6pm.
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 on 5712725166. 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.
/Charlee J. C. Bennett/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Prosecution Insights