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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending in the current application.
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.
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) 1-11, 13-16, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katata (US 6566632) in view of Dalakos (US 20060165994).
As to claim 1, Katata discloses a substrate holder comprising:
A core body having a first surface facing a mounted substrate and a second surface opposite the first surface (figure 1: ‘core’ ceramic component 2; figure 2H: component 2 including ‘core’ layer 25 with top facing substrate 1 [fig 1] and bottom opposing surface);
An electrode layer on the first surface and the second surface (figure 2H: electrode 3 and 4 on top and bottom surfaces of 25);
A ceramic insulating layer covering the electrode layer on the first and second surface of the core body (figure 2H: layers 27 and 23 covering top and bottom of electrodes 3 and 4 respectively; col 4 lines 25-27: layers comprise alumina [a ceramic insulator]).
Katata, while disclosing a substrate support with electrode layers surrounding by a ceramic layer, is silent as to a coating and buffer layers with the requisite strain energy densities.
Dalakos discloses a substrate support containing an insulating core layer with electrodes formed on the top and bottom of the core (figure 3: insulating layer 42 and electrodes 46 and 48 [paragraph 60]). Dalakos also discloses knowledge in the art of forming a further buffer and protective coating layer around the structure (figure 3: insulative/buffer layer 48 and outer protective coating layer 50) to prevent cracking (abstract; paragraph 3), the buffer layer having a lower strain energy density than that of the coating layer (paragraph 82: example with PBN and AlN for the insulative/buffer and protective coating [thus meeting the strain energy density properties as evidenced by the instant specification table 1 -PBN coeff: 2.7 and table 2- AlN coeff: 6101.7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the extra coatings of Dalakos, in the structure of Katata, because this helps prevent cracking during usage.
As to claim 2, Katata discloses the electrode comprises an electrostatic upper electrode and lower resistive heating electrode (figure 2H: electrodes 3 and 4; col 3 lines 40-50: heating electrode 4 and electrostatic chucking electrode 3).
As to claim 3, Katata discloses an alumina ceramic insulating layer and Dalakos discloses an AlN protective coating layer (abstract, as discussed above)[instant tables 1 and 2: stiffness of AlO, AlN 295 and 330 respectively).
As to claim 4, Dalakos discloses the buffer layer has a strain energy density less than half the strain energy density of the coating layer (instant specification table 1 -PBN coeff: 2.7 and table 2- AlN coeff: 6101.7).
As to claim 5, Katata discloses an insulating layer that may comprise AlO, AlN or AlON (abstract) and Dalakos discloses an intermediate insulating [buffer] layer that may comprise pyrolytic graphite, pyrolytic boron nitride, pyrolytic carbon doped boron nitride, SiC, SiOC, WC, TiC and/or pyrolytic carbon doped boron nitride, etc. (abstract, claim 2) and a protective layer of AlO, AlN, and/or AlON (abstract). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a combination of insulating layer, buffer and outer protective layer with the various materials disclosed by Katata and Dalakos that contain the requisite relative strain energy density values, because the choice of materials would be within the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art to obtain the objectives of both Katata and Dalakos.
As to claim 6, Katata discloses the ceramic insulating layer comprises a first layer on the core body and covering the core body and a second flat layer covering the electrode layer (figure 2H: core body 25 with insulating layers 24-5 covering the core body, and flat insulating layers 23,7 covering electrodes 3 and 4).
As to claim 7, Katata discloses the first and second insulating layers are the same material (col 4 lines 25-27: each sheet 2 is alumina).
As to claims 8-9, Dalakos discloses the protective coating layer is between 1 and 75 micron, or greater as desired (paragraph 33) and is deposited on the underlying ‘buffer’ layer, but is silent as to the thickness of the buffer layer. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to experimentally choose the relative layer thickness, including equal or greater protective layer thicknesses, as routine experimentation and selection of result effective variables, such as functional layer thicknesses, is within the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art (2144.05 II (A-B). Additionally, selection of relative sizes of components, such as layers, is also recognized as within the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art (2144.04 IV (A)).
As to claim 10, Dalakos discloses a buffer layer (as discussed above, figure 3: layer 48), and discloses the layer comprises “pyrolytic boron nitride, pyrolytic graphite and/or carbon doped boron nitride” [emphasis added]. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that for the layer to be composed of two distinct materials, either it is a mixture of these materials, or composed of separate sublayers of the materials. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the functional interlayer/buffer layer of sublayers of the disclosed materials to obtain the effective functional structure of Dalakos.
As to claim 11, the selection of materials, as discussed above, would be within the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art and therefore using PBN, C-PBN or pyrolytic graphite layers in an order in an order that satisfies the requisite CTE and stiffness relation of the instant claim would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
As to claim 13, Katata discloses a substrate holder comprising:
A core body having a first surface facing a mounted substrate and a second surface opposite the first surface (figure 1: ‘core’ ceramic component 2; figure 2H: component 2 including ‘core’ layer 25 with top facing substrate 1 [fig 1] and bottom opposing surface);
An electrode layer on the first surface and the second surface (figure 2H: electrode 3 and 4 on top and bottom surfaces of 25);
A ceramic insulating layer covering the electrode layer on the first and second surface of the core body (figure 2H: layers 27 and 23 covering top and bottom of electrodes 3 and 4 respectively; col 4 lines 25-27: layers comprise alumina [a ceramic insulator]).
Katata, while disclosing a substrate support with electrode layers surrounding by a ceramic layer, is silent as to a coating and buffer layers with the requisite materials and stiffness and the ceramic insulating layer being PBN.
Dalakos discloses a substrate support containing an insulating core layer comprising PBN, with electrodes formed on the top and bottom of the core (figure 3: insulating layer 42 and electrodes 46 and 48 [paragraph 60]; paragraph 58: core may be PBN). Dalakos also discloses knowledge in the art of forming a further buffer and a metal oxide or nitride protective coating layer around the structure (abstract: AlN, AlO or AlON protective layer; figure 3: insulative/buffer layer 48 and outer protective coating layer 50; paragraph 59: exemplary tie/interlayer [buffer] including materials of SiC, WC, ZrC, etc.) to prevent cracking (abstract; paragraph 3), the protective coating layer having a higher stiffness than PBN (instant specification table1: PBN stiffness 36.5, table 2:AlO and AlN stiffnesses 330, 295).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the core material and extra coatings of Dalakos, in the structure of Katata, because this helps prevent cracking during usage.
As to claim 14, Dalakos discloses the buffer layer has a lower strain energy density than that of the coating layer (paragraph 82: example with PBN and AlN for the insulative/buffer and protective coating [thus meeting the strain energy density properties as evidenced by the instant specification table 1 -PBN coeff: 2.7 and table 2- AlN coeff: 6101.7).
As to claim 15, Dalakos discloses the buffer layer has a strain energy density less than half the strain energy density of the coating layer (instant specification table 1 -PBN coeff: 2.7 and table 2- AlN coeff: 6101.7).
As to claim 16, Katata discloses an insulating layer that may comprise AlO, AlN or AlON (abstract) and Dalakos discloses an intermediate insulating [buffer] layer that may comprise pyrolytic graphite, pyrolytic boron nitride, pyrolytic carbon doped boron nitride, SiC, SiOC, WC, TiC and/or pyrolytic carbon doped boron nitride, etc. (abstract, claim 2) and a protective layer of AlO, AlN, and/or AlON (abstract). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a combination of insulating layer, buffer and outer protective layer with the various materials disclosed by Katata and Dalakos that contain the requisite relative strain energy density values, because the choice of materials would be within the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art to obtain the objectives of both Katata and Dalakos.
As to claim 18, Katata discloses the electrode comprises an electrostatic upper electrode and lower resistive heating electrode (figure 2H: electrodes 3 and 4; col 3 lines 40-50: heating electrode 4 and electrostatic chucking electrode 3).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katata in view of Dalakos, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kano (US 20090107635).
Dalakos discloses a substrate support with a core and electrodes and comprising an insulating layer of pyrolytic boron nitride and a protective layer (abstract; figure 3), as discussed above, but is silent as to the protective layer being yttrium oxide.
Kano discloses a substrate support containing an electrostatic chucking electrode, heater electrode, and ceramic core components (paragraph 4), the support further containing an outer yttrium oxide protective layer to protect the support from corrosive gases used during substrate processing (paragraphs 43-45, paragraph 56: exemplary yttrium oxide protective layer).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use yttrium oxide as a protective layer in a substrate support, as disclosed by Kano, in the system of Katata in view of Dalakos, because this allows for resistance to corrosion.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katata in view of Dalakos, as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Hayashi (US 20050211384).
As to claim 17, Katata in view of Dalakos discloses knowledge in the art of a ceramic layer and protective layer, as discussed above, but are silent as to use of silicon nitride and yttrium oxide for these layers.
Hayashi discloses knowledge in the art of a substrate support including an electrostatic chuck (figure 1, paragraph 35) in which the ceramic support comprises materials including alumina, AlN or SiN and a sprayed resistant material is used over the surface, the material including yttrium oxide (paragraphs 2, 45, 47).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use alternative ceramic and protective materials, such as silicon nitride and yttrium oxide, as disclosed by Hayashi, in the system of Katata in view of Dalakos, because this allows for use of known effective alternative materials in the construction of a functional processing chamber for the structural and protection portions.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katata in view of Dalakos and Matsuyama (US 20100118464).
As to claim 19, Katata discloses a substrate processing apparatus comprising:
A process chamber with interior for processing a substrate (figure 5: chamber 21 with substrate 1);
A gas supplier configured to supply process gas to the internal space (figure 5: gas inlet 23);
A first support for supporting the substrate comprising:
A core body having a first surface facing a mounted substrate and a second surface opposite the first surface (figure 1: ‘core’ ceramic component 2; figure 2H: component 2 including ‘core’ layer 25 with top facing substrate 1 [fig 1] and bottom opposing surface);
An electrode layer on the first surface and the second surface (figure 2H: electrode 3 and 4 on top and bottom surfaces of 25);
A ceramic insulating layer covering the electrode layer on the first and second surface of the core body (figure 2H: layers 27 and 23 covering top and bottom of electrodes 3 and 4 respectively; col 4 lines 25-27: layers comprise alumina [a ceramic insulator]);
A plate facing the second surface of the core body and a second support connected to the plate (figure 5: stage and unlabeled support ‘bottom’ of chamber holding ceramic structure 2 with core ceramic component);
A power supply line connected to the electrode layer (figure 5: power supply lines from supplies 7 and 8 to electrodes).
Katata, while disclosing a substrate support with electrode layers surrounding by a ceramic layer, is silent as to a coating and buffer layers with the requisite strain energy densities.
Dalakos discloses a substrate support containing an insulating core layer with electrodes formed on the top and bottom of the core (figure 3: insulating layer 42 and electrodes 46 and 48 [paragraph 60]). Dalakos also discloses knowledge in the art of forming a further buffer and protective coating layer around the structure (figure 3: insulative/buffer layer 48 and outer protective coating layer 50) to prevent cracking (abstract; paragraph 3), the buffer layer having a lower strain energy density than that of the coating layer (paragraph 82: example with PBN and AlN for the insulative/buffer and protective coating [thus meeting the strain energy density properties as evidenced by the instant specification table 1 -PBN coeff: 2.7 and table 2- AlN coeff: 6101.7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the extra coatings of Dalakos, in the structure of Katata, because this helps prevent cracking during usage.
Katata, while disclosing an underlying support structure for the ceramic substrate support and supplying electric supply lines to the electrodes, is silent as to the supply lines through the underlying support plate.
Matsuyama discloses a processing chamber with substrate support, the support containing a ceramic core with electrostatic and heating electrodes (figure 1; figure 2: electrostatic chuck with resistor ‘core’ 55 with electrode 53 and resistive heating electrode 55; paragraph 39: ceramic structure with electrodes), the support structure on an underlying plate and support with the electrode supply wiring through the underlying support structure (figure 1: susceptor ‘plate’ 12 supporting electrostatic chuck 24 with wiring from power supplies 21/22 through support structure).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to feed power through the underlying support, as disclosed by Matsuyama, in the system of Katata, because this allows for power supply lines to the internal electrodes without the lines travelling through the processing area containing plasma and/or deposition and etching gases.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katata in view of Dalakos and Matsuyama, as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Hayashi (US 20050211384).
As to claim 20, Katata in view of Dalakos discloses knowledge in the art of a pyrolytic graphite electrode and ceramic insulating layer of pyrolytic boron nitride (Dalakos at paragraph 82: example with PBN; paragraph 58: use of pyrolytic graphite as resistive heating electrode), a ceramic ‘buffer’ layer and protective layer, as discussed above, but are silent as to use of silicon nitride and yttrium oxide for the ceramic buffer and protective layers.
Hayashi discloses knowledge in the art of a substrate support including an electrostatic chuck (figure 1, paragraph 35) in which the ceramic support comprises materials including alumina, AlN or SiN and a sprayed resistant material is used over the surface, the material including yttrium oxide (paragraphs 2, 45, 47).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use alternative ceramic and protective materials, such as silicon nitride and yttrium oxide, as disclosed by Hayashi, in the system of Katata in view of Dalakos, because this allows for use of known effective alternative materials in the construction of a functional processing chamber for the structural and protection portions.
Correspondence Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON BERMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5265. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday 8-4.
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, James Lin can be reached on (571) 272-8902. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JASON BERMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794
Prosecution Insights