DETAILED ACTION
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the term “disclosed herein” is stated in line 1. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 10-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’979 (US 2020/0291979) cited by applicant.
With respect to claim 1, US’979 discloses a fastener 80 comprising: a head 85; and a shank (between 80A and 80B) connected to a first side of the head, wherein: a first portion of the shank is threaded 82. See Figs 1-2, [0040-0041].
However, US’979 fails to explicitly teach a first zone extends from a second side of the head to at least the first side of the head; a second zone covers at least a portion of the first portion; an outermost surface of the fastener in the first zone is provided by a hard coating; and an outermost surface of the fastener in the second zone is provided by a dry lubricant coating as claimed. However, US’979 does teach with respect to Fig. 10, area 84 having a dry lubricant coating 102, and threaded area 82 having a corrosion resistant coating. See [0054-0060].
Therefore, it would be considered an obvious expedient for the corrosion resistant coating to be considered a hard coating.
With respect to claim 2, US’979 teaches wherein the first portion includes the entire length of the shank. See paragraphs [0040], [0041] and figures 1-2B: the threaded area (82).
With respect to claim 3, US’979 teaches wherein the first portion is less than the entire length of the shank. See paragraphs [0040], [0041] and figures 1-2B: the threaded area (82).
With respect to claim 4, US’979 teaches wherein the second zone covers the entire first portion of the shank. See paragraph [0058] and figure 10A: the dry film lubricant coating (102) covers the entire of the bolt (80).
With respect to claim 5, US’979 teaches wherein the second zone covers less than the entire first portion of the shank. See paragraph [0059] and figure 10B: the dry film lubricant coating (102) covers the cylindrical expansion area (84).
With respect to claim 10, US’979 teaches wherein the head is a socket head. See paragraph [0040] and figure 1: the bolt (80) may have different head geometries.
With respect to claim 11, US’979 teaches wherein the head is a button head. See paragraph [0040] and figure 1: the bolt (80) may have different head geometries.
With respect to claim 12, US’979 teaches wherein the head is a countersink head. See paragraph [0040] and figure 1: the bolt (80) may have different head geometries.
With respect to claim 13, US’979 teaches wherein the head is a hexagonal head. See paragraph [0040] and figure 1: the bolt (80) may have different head geometries.
With respect to claim 14, US’979 teaches wherein the head is a pan head. See paragraph [0040] and figure 1: the bolt (80) may have different head geometries.
Claim(s) 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’979 in view of KR’099 (KR 200184099) cited by applicant.
With respect to claims 6 and 7, US’979 discloses the fastener as stated above. However, US’979 fails to explicitly teach: wherein the dry lubricant coating is tungsten disulfide (WS2); or wherein the dry lubricant coating is one of the following: tungsten disulfide (WS2), molybdenum disulfide (MS2), tin disulfide (SnS2), bismuth trisulfide (Bi2S3), antimony trisulfide (Sb2S3), or any combination of two or more thereof as claimed.
KR’099 teaches a bolt (30) has a shank at least partially dry-coated by tungsten disulfide (WS₂). See paragraphs [0025]-[0033] and figure 4.
Therefore, it would be considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the present application to provide for the shank at least partially dry-coated by tungsten disulfide in order to provide a fastener/bolt with well-known dry lubricant coating.
Claim(s) 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’979 in view of US’549 (US 2018/0195549) cited by applicant.
With respect to claims 8 and 9, US’979 discloses the fastener as stated above. However, US’979 fails to explicitly teach: wherein the hard coating is an alumina coating; or wherein the hard coating is one of the following: alumina, yttria-stabilized zirconia (YSZ), yttrium aluminum garnet (YAG), yttrium aluminum monoclinic (YAM), yttrium aluminum perovskite (YAP), or any combination of two or more thereof as claimed.
US’549 teaches a cylindrical shank portion (16) of a pin member (12) is coated with coating (22), which is alumina (A1₂O₃), for corrosion resistance. See Fig. 1 and [0030].
Therefore, it would be considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the present application to provide for an alumina coating in order to provide a well-known hard coating.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’979 in view of US’819 (US 2017/0121819) cited by applicant.
With respect to claim 15, US’979 fails to explicitly teach a kit for use in a semiconductor wafer processing chamber, the kit comprising at least four of the fasteners of claim 1 as claimed.
US’819 teaches a fastening hardware (606) of a processing chamber used
for depositing films on substrates (see paragraphs [0078], [0079]; claim 1; and figures 7A, 7B).
Therefore, it would be considered obvious to combine the teachings of US’819 with that of the fasteners of US’979 (see rejection of claim 1) in order to arrive at the claimed subject matter.
Claim(s) 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’819 in view of US’979, and further in view of KR’099, or US’549.
With respect to claim 16, US’819 discloses an apparatus comprising: a spindle having an indexer hub with a plurality of indexer arms extending therefrom (a substrate processing system (100) comprising: an engagement and rotation mechanism (220) comprising a spindle (303); spider forks (226) including first and second arms; and a fastening hardware (606) (see paragraphs [0053],
[0060], [0061], [0078], [0079] and figures 1, 2, 7A, 7B).
US’819 fails to explicitly teach a plurality of fasteners with exposed heads supported by the indexer hub, wherein: each fastener of the plurality of fasteners has a shank connected to a first side of a head; a first portion of the shank is threaded; a first zone extends from a second side of the head to at least the first side of the head; a second zone covers at least a portion of the first portion; an outermost surface of the fastener in the first zone is provided by a hard coating; and an outermost surface of the fastener in the second zone is provided by a dry lubricant coating as claimed.
US’979 teaches a fastener as stated above. See the rejection of claim 1. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to combine the teachings of US’979 with that of US’819 to arrive at the claimed subject matter.
With respect to claim 17, US’819 teaches further comprising a chamber with four wafer processing stations, wherein the indexer hub is in a central area of the chamber. See paragraphs [0053], [0060] and figures 1, 2: a
processing chamber (102) comprising four processing stations (ST1, ST2, ST3, ST4).
With respect to claim 18, US’819 teaches further comprising a remote plasma source, the remote plasma source configured to deliver plasma into the chamber and onto the indexer hub. See US’819 claim 1: the processing chamber used for depositing films on substrates using plasma.
With respect to claim 19, US’819 in view of US’979 fails to explicitly teach wherein the dry lubricant coating is tungsten disulfide.
KR’099 teaches a bolt (30) has a shank at least partially dry-coated by tungsten disulfide (WS₂). See paragraphs [0025]-[0033] and figure 4.
Therefore, it would be considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the present application to provide for the shank at least partially dry-coated by tungsten disulfide in order to provide a fastener/bolt with well-known dry lubricant coating.
With respect to claim 20, US’819 in view of US’979 fails to explicitly teach wherein the hard coating is an alumina coating.
US’549 teaches a cylindrical shank portion (16) of a pin member (12) is coated with coating (22), which is alumina (A1₂O₃), for corrosion resistance. See Fig. 1 and [0030].
Therefore, it would be considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the present application to provide for an alumina coating in order to provide a well-known hard coating.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2018/0135683 teaches an apparatus that includes a fastener. The fastener includes a head, a cylindrical shank that extends from the head and is dimensioned to engage in a fit with a corresponding hole, and a coating that is discontinuously speckled around a circumference of the shank and extends axially along the shank, leaving irregular portions of a surface of the shank exposed. The coating exhibits a higher lubricity than the surface, and the coating exhibits a higher dielectric withstand voltage than the surface.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZAKIYA W BATES whose telephone number is (571)272-7039. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am - 5pm.
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, Doug Hutton can be reached at 5712724137. 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.
/ZAKIYA W BATES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674 8/20/2026
Prosecution Insights