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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species C in the reply filed on 08/10/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 28-44 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 08/10/2026.
The Examiner notes that Claim 25 appears to be drawn to Fig. 5 due to the radial ends extending downward, and as such is also withdrawn from consideration.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 18, 21-24, 26 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Patent Application No. 2011/0132873 to Tsujimoto in view of United States Patent Application No. 2019/0244793 to Chen et al.
In regards to Claim 1, Tsujimoto teaches a showerhead for processing a substrate, the showerhead 120 Fig. 1 comprising: a backplate (top of 125, shown in red); and a faceplate (124 and bottom of 125 shown in yellow) attached to the backplate, wherein the faceplate comprises: a first surface facing the backplate (top of 124); a second surface opposite to the first surface; and a plurality of through holes 124 extending between the first and second surfaces [0036-0111], but does not expressly teach wherein a center portion of the second surface of the faceplate is convex.
PNG
media_image1.png
585
1014
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Chen teaches the bottom surface of an upper electrode 500 Fig. 5B, i.e., a second surface may have a bottom surface, i.e., a second surface 504-2 that is convex in the center of the second surface and flat around said convex surface, the convex portion be used to distribute the plasma in a substrate processing chamber [0052; 0023-0061].
PNG
media_image2.png
234
894
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have changed the second surface of the showerhead of Tsujimoto and modifying it to have the shape of the second surface of Chen. One would be motivated to do so for the predictable result of distributing the plasma as desired. See MPEP 2143 Motivation A. Furthermore, a change of shape is known in the art. It has been held that change of shape is generally recognized as being within the skill of one of ordinary skill in the art. It is noted that Applicant has not made any showing of criticality in the shape of the second surface of the showerhead faceplate of Tsujimoto that would tend to point toward the non-obviousness of freely selecting the convex shape as shown in Fig. 5B of Chen. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). See MPEP 2144.04 IV B.
In regards to Claim 18, Tsujimoto teaches the backplate and the faceplate are cylindrical; the faceplate comprises a sidewall (in green) attached to the backplate; the backplate, the faceplate, and the sidewall define a plenum (in gray); the showerhead further comprising: a stem portion 204, 202, 200 attached to the backplate, wherein the stem portion comprises a gas inlet 126; and a conduit 127 extending from the gas inlet through the stem portion, the backplate, and the faceplate to the plenum, wherein with the gas inlet, the plenum, and the through holes are in fluid communication with each other (as shown in Fig. 1).
In regards to Claim 21, Tsujimoto in view of Chen teaches wherein the backplate and the faceplate are cylindrical and wherein a remainder of the second surface of the faceplate extends radially outwards from ends of the center portion of the faceplate and is flat, as shown in Fig. 5B of Chen.
In regards to Claim 22, Tsujimoto in view of Chen teaches the first surface of the faceplate facing the backplate is flat and is parallel to the remainder, as shown in Fig. 5B of Chen as only the lower/second surface is changed.
In regards to Claim 23, Tsujimoto teaches the center portion and a portion of the remainder comprise the plurality of through holes, as shown in Fig. 1.
In regards to Claim 24, Tsujimoto teaches the first surface of the faceplate facing the backplate is flat, as shown in Fig. 1, and as shown in Fig. 5B of Chen, where only the bottom surface is shown for plasma distribution.
In regards to Claim 26, Tsujimoto in view of Chen teach the first surface of the faceplate facing the backplate is flat and is parallel to the first remainder.
In regards to Claim 27, Tsujimoto in view of Chen the center portion; and the first remainder, and a portion of the second remainder comprise the plurality of through holes, as per the rejection of Claim 1 above.
Claim(s) 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Patent Application No. 2011/0132873 to Tsujimoto in view of United States Patent Application No. 2019/0244793 to Chen et al, as per the rejection of claim 1 above, and in further view of United States Patent Application No. 2012/0222815 to Sabri et al.
The teachings of Tsujimoto in view of Chen are relied upon as set forth in the above 103 rejection.
In regards to Claim 19, Tsujimoto teaches a system comprising: the showerhead of claim 1; a pedestal 300 to support the substrate; but does not expressly teach an actuator to move the pedestal relative to the showerhead; and a controller to control the actuator.
In regards to Claim 20, Tsujimoto teaches a system comprising: the showerhead of claim 18; a gas source 130 to supply a gas to the gas inlet 126; a pedestal 300 to support the substrate; a radio frequency source 348, 358 to supply radio frequency power to activate the gas; and a controller 400 to control the gas source, the radio frequency source but does not expressly teach an actuator to move the pedestal relative to the showerhead or that the controller controls this actuator and the actuator.
Tsujimoto teaches the showerhead moves in relation to the pedestal but not the pedestal in relation to the showerhead.
Sabri teaches a system comprising a showerhead 115 and a pedestal 110, the pedestal having movement due to a drive actuator that raises and lifts the pedestal relative to the showerhead and a controller that controls said movement with other functions of the system [0060; 0054-0131].
It has been held that an express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). See MPEP 2144.06 II. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to have modified the apparatus of Tsujimoto in view of Chen, by substituting the showerhead to pedestal movement mechanism from that of a showerhead movement to change the distance between the showerhead and the substrate to that of the movement of the pedestal, as per the teachings of Sabri. One would be motivated to do so for the predictable result of substituting an art analogous mechanism of closing the gap between the showerhead and the pedestal for desired processing. See MPEP 2143 Motivation A/B. The resulting apparatus fulfills the limitations of the claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. United States Patent No. 11515125 to Saito that expressly teaches another convex faceplate only shape.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIFFANY Z NUCKOLS whose telephone number is (571)270-7377. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM-7PM.
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.
/TIFFANY Z NUCKOLS/Examiner, Art Unit 1716
/Jeffrie R Lund/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights