CTNF 18/706,772 CTNF 86712 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1, 3, 7, 37, 39, 45 and 63 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Strzyzesvski 2004/0058464 . In Re Claim 1, Strzyzesvski teaches a substrate processing tool comprising: a first processing module (4); a substrate transfer chamber (2) connected to the first processing module; one or more pumps (13); a backfill source (11); a plurality of valves (openable/closable purge line 11, Paragraph 12 and Valve 14, Fig. 2) connected to the one or more pumps and the backfill source; and one or more controllers (Paragraph 7) configured to control the one or more pumps and the plurality of valves to reduce a chamber pressure in the substrate transfer chamber from a first chamber pressure to a second chamber pressure and then backfill the substrate transfer chamber with an inert gas to a third chamber pressure prior to permitting transfer of a substrate into the first processing module, (14) subsequent to backfilling the substrate transfer chamber, cause a transfer of the substrate from the substrate transfer chamber to the first processing module, (Paragraph 14) and cause the first processing module to process the substrate (Paragraph 15). In Re Claim 3, Strzyzesvski teaches wherein, the one or more pumps comprise a first pump (13); the plurality of valves comprise a first valve (14) connected to the first pump and the substrate transfer chamber; and the one or more controllers (process control element, Paragraph 7) are configured to control a state of the first valve to pump down to the second chamber pressure. In Re Claim 7, Strzyzesvski teaches a plurality of processing modules comprising the first processing module (4) and a second processing module (3), wherein: the plurality of processing modules are configured to perform different respective types of substrate processing; (Paragraph 3) and the substrate transfer chamber is connected to the plurality of processing modules, wherein the substrate transfer chamber is configured to transfer the substrate from the first processing module to the second processing module. (See Fig. 1) In Re Claim 37, Strzyzesvski teaches wherein the one or more pumps include a single pump (14). In Re Claim 39, Strzyzesvski teaches wherein the inert gas comprises argon. (Paragraph 12) In Re Claim 63, Strzyzesvski teaches wherein the substrate transfer chamber is a vacuum transfer module. (Paragraph 14, 18) In Re Claim 45, Strzyzesvski teaches a method of operating a substrate processing tool, the method comprising: receiving a substrate at a substrate transfer chamber (2), wherein the substrate transfer chamber is connected to a first processing module (4) and a second processing module (5); pumping, via one or more pumps (13), the substrate transfer chamber down from a first chamber pressure to a second chamber pressure; (Paragraph 14) backfilling the substrate transfer chamber with an inert gas from the second chamber pressure to a third chamber pressure; (Paragraph 14) transferring the substrate from the substrate transfer chamber to the first processing module; (Paragraph 14) performing a first type of substrate process on the substrate in the first processing module; (Paragraph 15) subsequent to processing the substrate in the first processing module, transferring the substrate from the first processing module back to the substrate transfer chamber; (Paragraph 14-17) backfilling the substrate transfer chamber with the inert gas from the third chamber pressure to the first chamber pressure; (Paragraph 14-17) and transferring the substrate from the substrate transfer chamber to the second processing module. (Paragraph 14-17) Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strzyzesvski and in view of Yamamoto et al. 2014/0003892 . In Re Claim 6, Strzyzesvski teaches the tool of Claim 1 as discussed above. Strzyzesvski does not teach a mass flow controller. However, Yamamoto et al. teach a mass flow controller (314, Fig. 2), wherein: one of the plurality of valves (316) is connected in series with the mass flow controller and between the backfill source (312) and the substrate transfer chamber (300), wherein the mass flow controller is configured to adjust flow of the inert gas from the backfill source to the substrate transfer chamber; (Paragraph 75 and 76) and the one or more controllers are configured to control operation of the mass flow controller and the one of the plurality of valves to supply the inert gas to backfill the substrate transfer chamber to the third chamber pressure; (Paragraph 75 and 76) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed to use a mass flow controller of Strzyzesvski as taught by Yamamoto with a reasonable expectation for success in order to in order to more accurately control gas distribution and pressure . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 34 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strzyzesvski and in view of Stowell, Jr. et al. 2014/0318452 . In Re Claims 34 and 36, Strzyzesvski teaches the tool of Claim 1 as discussed above. Strzyzesvski does not teach wherein the one or more pumps include a turbo pump and a water pump. However, Stowell, Jr. et al. teach wherein the one or more pumps include a turbo pump and a water pump; (paragraph 63) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed to use a water pump and turbo pump in the tool of Strzyzesvski as taught by Stowell, Jr. et al. with a reasonable expectation for success in order to in order to provide automated pumping . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strzyzesvski and in view of Fujii 2011/0125331 . In Re Claim 35, Strzyzesvski teaches the tool of Claim 1 as discussed above. Strzyzesvski does not teach wherein the one or more pumps include a turbo pump and not a water pump. However, Fujii teaches wherein the one or more pumps include a turbo pump and not a water pump. (Paragraph 20) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed to use a turbo pump in the tool of Strzyzesvski as taught by Fujii with a reasonable expectation for success in order to in order to provide automated pumping . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 38 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strzyzesvski and in view of Savandaiah et al. 2022/0051918 . In Re Claims 38, Strzyzesvski teaches the tool of Claim 1 as discussed above. Strzyzesvski does not teach wherein the one or more pumps includes two or more pumps for pumping gases from the substrate transfer chamber. However, Savandaiah et al. teach wherein the one or more pumps includes two or more pumps (212) for pumping gases from the substrate transfer chamber (106). (Paragraph 19) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed to use a turbo pump in the tool of Strzyzesvski as taught by Savandaiah et al. with a reasonable expectation for success in order to in order to provide a second pump for increasing capacity and providing a backup in case one is not working . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-07 AIA 07-97 12-51-07 Claim s 40, 41, 43 and 44 are allowed. 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 12, 21, 31, 32, 33, 46, 47 and 49 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. Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure : Devine et al., Liang et al. and Khan et al. teach a transfer chamber with a vacuum exhaust pump wherein the chamber is backfilled with an inert gas. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GLENN F MYERS whose telephone number is (571)270-1160. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4 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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at 571-272-7097. 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. GLENN F. MYERS Examiner Art Unit 3652 /GLENN F MYERS/ Examiner, Art Unit 3652 Application/Control Number: 18/706,772 Page 2 Art Unit: 3652 Application/Control Number: 18/706,772 Page 3 Art Unit: 3652 Application/Control Number: 18/706,772 Page 4 Art Unit: 3652 Application/Control Number: 18/706,772 Page 5 Art Unit: 3652 Application/Control Number: 18/706,772 Page 6 Art Unit: 3652 Application/Control Number: 18/706,772 Page 7 Art Unit: 3652 Application/Control Number: 18/706,772 Page 8 Art Unit: 3652
Prosecution Insights