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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/29/2026 has been entered. Therefore, claims 1-20 are pending for consideration following applicant’s amendment filed 6/29/2026.
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 14-20 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.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "a source of the first vapor precursor" in line 11 of the claim. However, a source of the first vapor precursor is previously recited in lines 3-4 of the claim. Therefore, it is unclear whether these recitations refer to the same source. It appears that claim 14 should recite “the source of the first vapor precursor”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 –
(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.
Claim(s) 9, 14, 18, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bang et al. (US Patent 7,192,486).
Regarding Claim 9, Bang discloses a precursor delivery system, comprising: a source of precursor in gaseous form (the output of 11c is a gas precursor because the liquid precursor has been vaporized and mixed with the carrier gas from 33c; therefore, 11c is seen to be readable as a “source of precursor in gaseous form” as claimed) a gas panel (gas panel having upstream end and downstream end as shown in the annotated Figure 2 below) that is operable to control delivery of one or more precursors to a substrate processing system (control via at least valve 91c; the precursor from 25c delivered to the substrate processing system including chamber 35), the gas panel coupled with the source of the precursor in gaseous form (at mixing manifold 37) and comprising a mass flow controller 39b; and a remote precursor delivery system (including 25a and 11a) that is fluidly coupled with an upstream end of the gas panel (as shown in the annotated Figure 2 below; the upstream end including the mixing manifold 37), the remote precursor delivery system comprising: a precursor source (including 25a and 11a; see annotated Figure 2 below) associated with a non-gaseous precursor (liquid precursor source TEB), the precursor source being operable to generate a vapor from the non-gaseous precursor (a vapor is generated within valve 11a as described in col. 11, line 52 - col. 12, line 9); and a flow controller 90a that is operable to control a flow of the vapor to the gas panel (col. 10, lines 42-46).
PNG
media_image1.png
536
732
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 14, when making and using the device of Bang, Bang necessarily discloses a method for delivering precursors to a processing chamber 35, comprising: delivering a first vapor precursor (first vapor precursor formed within 11c, originating from 25c) through a gas delivery line (gas delivery line shown in the annotated Figure 2 above) from a source of a gaseous precursor (the output of 11c is a gas precursor because the liquid precursor has been vaporized and mixed with the carrier gas from 33c; therefore, 11c is seen to be readable as “a source of gaseous precursor” as claimed) coupled to a gas panel (gas panel as shown in the annotated Figure 2 above; 11c is coupled to the gas panel at 37) to a processing chamber 35, wherein the gaseous precursor is not vaporized between the source of the gaseous precursor and the gas panel (the gaseous precursor is not vaporized between 11c and the panel because it is already vaporized at 11c; i.e. the gaseous precursor is not vaporized again); vaporizing a non-gaseous precursor (non-gaseous precursor provided from 25a, this precursor vaporized within 11a) to generate a second vapor precursor (within 11a); delivering the second vapor precursor (from 11a) to an upstream end of the gas panel (as shown in the annotated Figure 2 above) from a remote precursor delivery system (remote precursor delivery system including 25a and 11a as shown in the annotated Figure 2 above); and delivering the second vapor precursor (from 11a) to the processing chamber 35 through the gas delivery line from the gas panel (as shown in the annotated Figure 2 above), wherein a source of the first vapor precursor (11c providing the source of the first vapor precursor as described above) and the non-gaseous precursor (non-gaseous precursor provided from 25a) are in different phases of matter (the first vapor precursor is a vapor or gas phase while the non-gaseous precursor is a liquid phase).
Regarding Claim 18, Bang is seen as further disclosing the first vapor precursor is delivered to the processing chamber after the second vapor precursor (during normal use of the system, all of the precursors are delivered and stopped during multiple events; therefore, there is necessarily a time in which the first vapor precursor is delivered after an event which includes delivering the second vapor precursor).
Regarding Claim 19, Bang is seen as further disclosing the first vapor precursor and the second vapor precursor are delivered to the processing chamber sequentially (during normal use of the system, all of the precursors are delivered and stopped during multiple events; therefore, it is seen that there is necessarily a time in which either the first vapor precursor or second vapor precursor is delivered directly after the other, thereby resulting in these materials being delivered sequentially).
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.
Claims 1 and 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bang et al. (US Patent 7,192,486) in view of Cheng et al. (US Patent Application 2022/0297037).
Regarding Claim 1, Bang discloses a semiconductor processing system (col. 1, lines 5-7), comprising: at least one processing chamber 35, each of the at least one processing chamber comprising a gas distribution assembly (distribution plate 106); a container of precursor 25b; a gas panel (including mixing manifold 37; see attached annotated Figure 2 above indicating the upstream end and downstream end of the gas panel) that is fluidly coupled with each gas distribution assembly 106 (as shown in Figure 2) and the container of precursor 25b, the gas panel comprising a mass flow controller 39b; and a remote precursor delivery system (including 25a and 11a; see annotated Figure 2 above) that is fluidly coupled with an upstream end of the gas panel (as shown in the annotated Figure 2 above; the upstream end including the mixing manifold 37), the remote precursor delivery system comprising: a precursor source (including 25a and 11a) associated with a non-gaseous precursor (liquid precursor source TEB), the precursor source being operable to generate a vapor from the non-gaseous precursor (a vapor is generated within valve 11a as described in col. 11, line 52 - col. 12, line 9); and a flow controller 90a that is operable to control a flow of the vapor to the gas panel (col. 10, lines 42-46).
Bang does not disclose the container of precursor 25b is a pressurized container of precursor in gaseous form.
Cheng teaches a system for delivering gas to a reaction chamber (para. 0024) including a chemical vapor deposition reactor and further teaches a container of precursor is a container of precursor in gaseous form (para. 0003; “In some cases, the precursor gases are contained in gaseous form in precursor source containers.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to modify the device of Bang to include a gaseous precursor source as taught by Cheng for the purpose of providing an additional precursor material to thereby accommodate the manufacture of different semiconductors.
It is noted that the container of gaseous precursor as taught by Cheng is seen to be pressurized as described in para. 0024 of Cheng (“The pressure difference between the precursor 11 and the reaction chamber 12 causes the vapor to flow toward the reaction chamber where it reacts with a surface of the wafer 14”). Alternatively, in the event that the container as taught by Cheng is not seen to be pressurized, it is seen that the selection of the pressure of the stored precursor gas would have been an obvious matter of design choice to maintain particular properties of the gas.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to modify the device of Bang in view of Cheng such that the container of precursor gas is provided with any desired pressure, including a pressure such that the container is a pressurized container, for the purpose of increasing the amount of gas able to be stored in the container and/or to allow the gas to flow out of the container under its own power.
Regarding Claim 6, Bang further discloses one or more purge lines (line 88a is readable as a purge line because it allows purging of the upstream components) that fluidly couple the remote precursor delivery system (including 25a and 11a) with the gas panel 37.
Regarding Claim 7, Bang further discloses each gas distribution assembly (including distribution plate 106) comprises an output manifold (the fluid manifold connecting the gas delivery line and the distribution plate 106; i.e. the portion within 35 and upstream of the outlets of plate 106); and the gas panel (as shown in the annotated Figure 2 above) is fluidly coupled with each gas distribution assembly 106 via a respective one of the output manifolds (as described above).
Regarding Claim 8, Bang further discloses a remote plasma unit 155 (as shown in Figure 1A) coupled with each gas distribution assembly (including distribution plate 106 as shown in Figure 1A), wherein the gas panel is fluidly coupled with each gas distribution assembly 106 via the remote plasma unit (the gas panel is fluidly coupled with 106 via line 157 and remote plasma unit 155 as shown in Figure 1A).
Claim 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bang et al. (US Patent 7,192,486) in view of Cheng et al. (US Patent Application 2022/0297037) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jiang et al. (US Patent 10,410,943).
Regarding Claim 2, Bang further discloses the remote precursor delivery system (including 25a and 11a as described above) comprises a first remote precursor delivery system (i.e. 10a); the semiconductor processing system further comprises a second remote precursor delivery system (including 25c and 11c as shown in Figure 2) that is fluidly coupled with the gas panel 37 (as shown in Figure 2), the second remote precursor delivery system comprising: a precursor source (including 25c and 11c) associated with a liquid precursor (liquid TEPO), the precursor source of the second remote precursor delivery system being operable to generate a vapor from the liquid precursor (a vapor is generated within valve 11c as described in col. 11, line 52 - col. 12, line 9); and a flow controller 90c that is operable to control a flow of the vapor from the liquid precursor to the gas panel (col. 10, lines 42-46).
Bang does not disclose the precursor source (25a and 11a) of the first remote precursor delivery system comprises a solid-phase precursor source.
Jiang teaches a system for manufacturing a semiconductor and further teaches a remote precursor delivery system comprises a solid-phase precursor source (precursor source 108 may be a liquid or a solid prior to vaporization; col. 4, lines 39-44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to modify the device of Bang to include a solid-phase precursor source as taught by Jiang for the purpose of providing an additional precursor material to thereby accommodate the manufacture of different semiconductors.
Claims 3 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bang et al. (US Patent 7,192,486) in view of Cheng et al. (US Patent Application 2022/0297037) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ye et al. (US Patent 8,927,066).
Regarding Claim 3, Bang does not disclose the remote precursor delivery system comprises a concentration sensor that is operable to determine a concentration of the vapor being delivered to the gas panel; and the remote precursor delivery system comprises a controller that is operable to adjust one or both of a temperature and a pressure of the non-gaseous precursor based on the concentration of the vapor.
Ye teaches a precursor delivery system (precursor stored in ampoule 102) and further teaches a concentration sensor 144 that is operable to determine a concentration of a vapor being delivered to a process chamber 122; and the precursor delivery system comprises a controller 152 that is operable to adjust one or both of a temperature and a pressure of the non-gaseous precursor based on the concentration of the vapor (col. 8, lines 4-12; e.g. a temperature of the first heated volume, which refers to the ampoule 102 housing the non-gaseous precursor, may be adjusted if the concentration is not within the desired tolerance level).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to modify the device of Bang to include a concentration sensor and controller operable to adjust the temperature of the non-gaseous precursor based on the concentration of the vapor as taught by Ye for the purpose of ensuring that the desired concentration of precursor is delivered to the process chamber.
Regarding Claim 5, Bang does not disclose one or more heated delivery lines that fluidly couple the remote precursor delivery system with the gas panel.
Ye teaches a precursor delivery system (precursor stored in ampoule 102) and further teaches one or more heated delivery lines (heated portions of delivery lines indicated at 126 as shown in Figure 1A, including portions upstream and downstream of junction 114) that fluidly couple the precursor delivery system (including ampoule 102) with a junction 114.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to modify the device of Bang to include one or more heated delivery lines that fluidly couple the remote precursor delivery system with the gas panel as taught by Ye for the purpose of ensuring the vaporized gas remains in the vapor state and prevent condensing as taught by Ye.
Claim 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bang et al. (US Patent 7,192,486) in view of Cheng et al. (US Patent Application 2022/0297037) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Liu et al. (US Patent Application 2016/0068961).
Regarding Claim 4, Bang further discloses the precursor source of the remote precursor delivery system comprises a liquid-phase precursor source (liquid TEB); and a liquid vaporizer 11a (a vapor is generated within valve 11a as described in col. 11, line 52 - col. 12, line 9).
Bang does not disclose the remote precursor delivery system comprises: a liquid flow controller that is fluidly coupled with the liquid-phase precursor source; and the liquid vaporizer fluidly coupled with a downstream end of the liquid flow controller.
Liu teaches a chemical delivery system and further teaches a liquid flow controller 22 that is fluidly coupled with a liquid-phase precursor source 10 (Figure 2 especially); and a liquid vaporizer 23 fluidly coupled with a downstream end of the liquid flow controller 22 (as shown in Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to modify the device of Bang to include a liquid flow controller directly upstream of the liquid vaporizer as taught by Liu for the purpose of providing a structure to precisely control the flow of the liquid upstream of the vaporizer.
Claims 10 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bang et al. (US Patent 7,192,486) in view of Jiang et al. (US Patent 10,410,943).
Regarding Claim 10, Bang further discloses the remote precursor delivery system (including 25a and 11a as described above) comprises a first remote precursor delivery system (i.e. 10a).
Bang does not disclose the precursor source (25a and 11a) of the first remote precursor delivery system comprises a solid-phase precursor source.
Jiang teaches a system for manufacturing a semiconductor and further teaches a remote precursor delivery system comprises a solid-phase precursor source (precursor source 108 may be a liquid or a solid prior to vaporization; col. 4, lines 39-44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to modify the device of Bang to include a solid-phase precursor source as taught by Jiang for the purpose of providing an additional precursor material to thereby accommodate the manufacture of different semiconductors.
Bang further does not disclose a second remote precursor delivery system in combination the remaining limitations set forth in the claim. However, Bang teaches a first remote precursor delivery system (as described with respect to claim 9 above). Providing an additional (second) remote precursor delivery system requires a mere duplication of parts and it has been generally that a mere duplication of parts is within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to modify the device of Bang to include a second remote precursor delivery system for the purpose of providing an additional precursor material to thereby accommodate the manufacture of different semiconductors. Therefore, Bang as modified is seen as further disclosing the precursor delivery system further comprises a second remote precursor delivery system (including additional elements 25x and 11x in the manner described above) that is fluidly coupled with the gas panel (fluidly coupled to the manifold in the same manner as achieved with respect to the first remote precursor delivery system as described above), the second remote precursor delivery system comprising: a precursor source (including 25x and 11x) associated with a liquid precursor (in the same manner as achieved with respect to the first remote precursor delivery system as described above), the precursor source of the second remote precursor delivery system being operable to generate a vapor from the liquid precursor (a vapor is generated within valve 11x as described above); and a flow controller 90x that is operable to control a flow of the vapor from the liquid precursor to the gas panel (as described above).
Regarding Claim 17, Bang further discloses the remote precursor delivery system (remote precursor delivery system including 25a and 11a of Bang) comprises a first remote precursor delivery system (generally at 10a); the non-gaseous precursor comprises a liquid precursor (from 25a; liquid TEB).
Bang does not disclose the method further comprises: vaporizing a solid precursor to generate a third vapor precursor.
Jiang teaches a method for manufacturing a semiconductor and further teaches a remote precursor delivery system comprises a solid-phase precursor source (precursor source 108 may be a liquid or a solid prior to vaporization; col. 4, lines 39-44) in combination with an additional non-gaseous precursor which is liquid (source 107 may be a liquid; col. 4, lines 54-57).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to modify the device and method of Bang to include a solid-phase precursor source as taught by Jiang for the purpose of providing an additional precursor material to thereby accommodate the manufacture of different semiconductors. Therefore, Bang in view of Jiang further discloses delivering the third vapor precursor to the gas panel 37 from a second remote precursor delivery system (e.g. an additional remote precursor delivery system analogous to 10a of Bang); and delivering the third vapor precursor to the processing chamber 35 from the gas panel.
Claim 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bang et al. (US Patent 7,192,486) in view of Jiang et al. (US Patent 10,410,943) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Josephson et al. (US Patent 9,032,990).
Regarding Claim 11, Bang does not disclose the first remote precursor delivery system, the second remote precursor delivery system, and the gas panel are disposed within a same housing.
Josephson teaches a system for delivering gas to a process chamber 204 and further teaches a first remote precursor delivery system (including a first ampoule 212 as shown in Figure 2), a second remote precursor delivery system (including a second ampoule 212 as shown in Figure 2), and a gas panel (including a mixing manifold indicated at 218 as shown in Figure 2) are disposed within a same housing (enclosure 202 as shown in Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to modify the device of Bang in view of Jiang such that the first remote precursor delivery system, the second remote precursor delivery system, and the gas panel are disposed within a same housing as taught by Josephson for the purpose of providing a structure to protect the fluid components from damage.
Claim 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bang et al. (US Patent 7,192,486) in view of Shero et al. (US Patent Application 2005/0000428).
Regarding Claim 12, Bang does not disclose the remote precursor delivery system and the gas panel are disposed within different housings.
Shero teaches a gas supply system and further teaches (Figure 7 especially) a remote precursor delivery system (including source vessel 10) and the gas panel (including the connection of line 20’ with lines 50’ and 58’ as shown in Figure 7) are disposed within different housings (16 and 18’, respectively).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to modify the device of Bang such that the remote precursor delivery system and the gas panel are disposed within different housings as taught by Shero for the purpose of providing structures to protect the fluid components from damage.
Claims 13, 15, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bang et al. (US Patent 7,192,486) in view of Ye et al. (US Patent 8,927,066).
Regarding Claim 13, Bang does not disclose a controller that is operable to control a concentration and flow rate of the vapor.
Ye teaches a precursor delivery system (precursor stored in ampoule 102) and further teaches a controller 152 that is operable to control a concentration and flow rate of a vapor (col. 8, lines 4-12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to modify the device of Bang to include a controller that is operable to control a concentration and flow rate of the vapor as taught by Ye for the purpose of ensuring that the desired concentration of precursor is delivered to the process chamber.
Regarding Claim 15, Bang does not disclose heating the second vapor precursor prior to delivering the second vapor precursor to the gas panel.
Ye teaches a precursor delivery system and method (including providing precursor stored in ampoule 102) and further teaches heating a precursor prior to delivering the vapor precursor to a gas panel (heated via heat sources 124 and 126 prior to delivering the vapor precursor to a gas panel including the junction 114).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to modify the device and method of Bang to heat the second vapor precursor prior to delivering the second vapor precursor to the gas panel as taught by Ye for the purpose of ensuring the vaporized gas remains in the vapor state and prevent condensing as taught by Ye.
Regarding Claim 16, Bang does not disclose determining a concentration of the second vapor precursor being delivered to the gas panel; and adjusting one or both of a temperature and a pressure of the non-gaseous precursor based on the concentration of the second vapor precursor.
Ye teaches a precursor delivery system and method (including providing precursor stored in ampoule 102) and further teaches determining a concentration of a vapor precursor being delivered to a process chamber (via a concentration sensor 144); and adjusting (via controller 152) one or both of a temperature and a pressure of the non-gaseous precursor based on the concentration of the second vapor precursor (col. 8, lines 4-12; e.g. a temperature of the first heated volume, which refers to the ampoule 102 housing the non-gaseous precursor, may be adjusted if the concentration is not within the desired tolerance level).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to modify the device and method of Bang to include determining a concentration of the second vapor precursor being delivered to the gas panel and adjusting one or both of a temperature and a pressure of the non-gaseous precursor based on the concentration of the second vapor precursor as taught by Ye for the purpose of ensuring that the desired concentration of precursor is delivered to the process chamber.
Claims 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bang et al. (US Patent 7,192,486).
Regarding Claim 19, Bang is seen as disclosing all of the elements of this claim as described above. Alternatively, in the event that Bang is not seen as necessarily disclosing the first vapor precursor and the second vapor precursor are delivered to the processing chamber sequentially, the selection of the particular sequence of delivering the chemicals is seen to be an obvious matter of design choice to fit the needs of a particular manufacturing process.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to modify the device and method of Bang such that the chemicals are delivered in any desired sequence, including sequentially, for the purpose of ensuring the necessary chemicals are delivered to the process chamber at the desired times.
Regarding Claim 20, Bang does not specifically disclose the first vapor precursor and the second vapor precursor are delivered to the processing chamber simultaneously.
However, the selection of the particular sequence of delivering the chemicals is seen to be an obvious matter of design choice to fit the needs of a particular manufacturing process.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to modify the device and method of Bang such that the chemicals are delivered in any desired sequence, including simultaneously, for the purpose of ensuring the necessary chemicals are delivered to the process chamber at the desired times.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Specifically, applicant argues that Bang fails to teach the new limitations of claim 1 which recites a pressurized container of precursor in gaseous form. However, applicant’s arguments are moot because newly applied Cheng is relied upon and teaches a container of precursor is a container of precursor in gaseous form (para. 0003; “In some cases, the precursor gases are contained in gaseous form in precursor source containers.”).
Applicant argues that Bang fails to teach the new limitations of claim 9 reciting “a source of a precursor in gaseous form”. These arguments are not persuasive because valve 11c of Bang is seen to be readable on the recited “source of a precursor in gaseous form” as described above. Specifically, a vapor is generated within valve 11c (as described in col. 11, line 52 - col. 12, line 9) and therefore the valve is seen to be readable as a source of precursor in gaseous form.
Applicant argues that Bang fails to teach the new limitations of claim 14 reciting “wherein the gaseous precursor is not vaporized between the source of the gaseous precursor and the gas panel”. These arguments are not persuasive because, as described above, valve 11c is seen to be readable on the recited source of gaseous precursor and the gaseous precursor is not vaporized again after flowing through valve 11c (and therefore the gaseous precursor is not vaporized between the source of the gaseous precursor and the gas panel as claimed).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN MURPHY whose telephone number is (571)270-5243. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am-4pm.
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, Craig Schneider can be reached on (571) 272-3607. 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.
/KEVIN F MURPHY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights