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 § 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 1-6 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 claim 1, the claim is directed to adjusting an oxidizing amount or a nitriding amount (preamble and step “deforming”), but the step of determining shape of the antenna member is only described to be determined based on the tendency for the oxidizing amount being increase or decrease as a distance from a bottom inside of the housing increases depending on the relative position of the susceptor. Such limitation is worded as being applicable to adjust the oxidizing and nitriding amount, but it would not be reasonable to apply such limitation to adjusting nitriding amount. For purpose of examination, such limitation is only applicable to only adjusting the oxidizing amount. However, applicant should clarify what is intended (for example, removing the nitriding limitations from the claims), without adding new matter. In addition, the limitation “a distance from a bottom inside of the housing increases” is unclear as it does not specify where does the distance is measured to (from the bottom inside of the housing). For purpose of examination, such distance is interpreted between the antenna to a bottom inside of the housing. However, Applicant should clarify what is intended, without adding new matter.
Regarding claim 5, the limitation “a distance from a top face of the process chamber” is unclear as it does not specify where does the distance is measured to (from the bottom inside of the housing). For purpose of examination, such distance is interpreted between the antenna to a top face of the process chamber. However, Applicant should clarify what is intended, without adding new matter. In addition, the “top face” in the specification is directed to a Faraday shield, not the process chamber. However, there is a disclosure of a “top plate” of the process chamber. There is no clear description of the position of the antenna member is determined by a distance from a top face of a top plate of the process chamber.
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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato1 (US20180073146) in view of Kato2 (US20130087097).
Regarding claim 1, Kato1 teaches a method of adjusting the plasma intensity (process amount) by changing the bent shape of an antenna (paragraphs 0006-0007, 0082), wherein the plasma process is oxidizing or nitriding (paragraphs 0103-0104, 0123), thus, Kato1 teaches the method is directed to adjust the plasma oxidizing or nitriding amount. Kato1 teaches to provide a process chamber and a susceptor installed inside the process chamber and configured to mount a substrate W along a circumferential direction of the susceptor 2 (paragraphs 0009 and 0029, see figure 1 and 2). Kato1 teaches the process chamber further include a housing 90 installed in the plasma generating part in the process chamber (paragraph 0047), wherein an antenna 83 is disposed on the process chamber and contained within the housing and extending along a radial direction of the susceptor from a central axis side of the susceptor towards an outer peripheral side of the susceptor (paragraphs 0048-0052, 0056, figures 6 and 4). Kato1 teaches plasma processing gas are supplied through nozzles 33 and 34 (process gas supply unit) which are accommodated in a region surrounded by the inner peripheral surface of the projection 92, the lower surface of the housing 90 and the upper surface of the susceptor 2 (paragraph 0056, see figures 4 and 6) (placing a process gas supply unit in an area defined by a bottom outside of the housing and an upper surface of the susceptor). Kato1 teaches determine the shape of the antenna for each specific recipe to adjust the plasma process intensity the longitudinal direction (paragraphs 0097 and 0084) (determining a shape of the antenna member based on the predetermine plasma oxidizing amount in the longitudinal direction). Kato1 teaches an inverted sheath type antenna has a shape configured to spread plasma, which is suitable for oxidizing plasma as it tends to shrink (paragraph 0104 figure 14D), wherein such shape results in the antenna having a distance to the bottom of the housing (the position of the bottom of the housing stay the same in the longitudinal direction, see figures 13 and 4) increase from the middle side towards the central axis side and also towards the outer side (see figure 14D). Since Kato1 also teaches the plasma intensity (process amount, oxidizing amount) is higher at the center side of the wafer than the outer peripheral side because of the movement velocity differences of the two portions, wherein the distance between the antenna and the bottom of the housing changes the intensity of the process amount (oxidizing amount) (paragraph 0082), Kato1 teaches the shape of the antenna member on the central axis side of the susceptor is determined based on ta tendency for the oxidizing amount to decrease as a distance from a bottom inside of the housing increase and the shape of the antenna member on the outside peripheral side of the susceptor is determined based on the tendency for the oxidizing amount to increase a the distance increases. Kato1 teaches to deform the antenna member based on the determined shape to adjust the process amount in the process chamber (paragraphs 0103-0104, 0090-0091, 0096 and 0101). Kato1 also teaches to determine a shape of the antenna member based on the nitriding amount in the longitudinal direction (paragraph 0103) and deform, based on the determined shape, the antenna member to adjust the nitriding amount (paragraph 0103).
Kato1 does not explicitly teaches the oxidizing or nitriding amount is a predetermined value. However, Kato2 teaches a similar film deposition apparatus and process of adjusting the distance between the antenna by adjusting the shape to adjust the plasma intensity to achieve plasma processing uniformity (paragraphs 0067-0068 (paragraphs 0011, 0043-0044, 0054, 0067-0068). Kato2 teaches the plasma process is oxidizing or nitriding (paragraph 0075 and 0091). Kato2 teaches to film thickness is measured for different position in the wafer, and the film thickness is proportional to the plasma intensity (oxidizing/nitriding amount increase, film thickness increase) (paragraph 0105), thus, Kato2 teaches to quantify the oxidizing amount/nitriding amount based on the thickness difference. Kato2 further teaches the relationship among the film thickness (oxidizing amount) and inclination angle of the antenna (which is the parameter to adjust the relative position of the antenna and the bottom surface of the housing; and equivalent to change of shape of antenna) is obtained by measuring preliminarily, and stored in a program for controlling the deformation of the antenna based on the input (thickness which quantifies the oxidizing amount) (paragraph 0090).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to quantify the oxidizing amount or the nitriding amount (predetermined value) as suggested by Kato2 in the method of Kato1 because Kato2 teaches the quantifying of the process intensity (oxidizing or nitriding amount) based on the thickness provides evaluation test results for the plasma uniformity of the process on the substrate (paragraphs 0105).
Regarding claim 2, Kato2 teaches the predetermined value is quantified by the thickness of the film (pargraph 0105), which includes the minimum value of the thickness among all measurement values (minimum value of the oxidizing amount or the nitriding amount). The comparison amount these values includes a normalized value with respect to the minimum value.
Regarding claim 3, Kato2 teaches the predetermined value is a common value at each measurement point (pargraph 0105).
Regarding claim 4, Kato1 teaches the connection members are formed of copper (a metal), which is soft and deformable (machineability) (paragraph 0080). It would be reasonably expected to take into consideration a machineability of a metal forming the antenna member as the antenna would break during the process of deformation (forming the shape) if the machineability if not being considered.
Regarding claim 5, Kato1 teaches the position of the antenna member is determined by a distance from a top face/plate of the process chamber (paragraphs 0111, 0052 and 0055).
Regarding claim 6, Kato1 teaches the central portion of the antenna member is disposed higher than a peripheral portion of the antenna member in the radial direction of the susceptor (paragraphs 0082, 0104-0405, see figure 14D).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NGA LEUNG V LAW whose telephone number is (571)270-1115. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am - 5 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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 5712721295. 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.
/NGA LEUNG V LAW/ Examiner, Art Unit 1717