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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-12, & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Takahashi et al. (US 2023/0377844).
Regarding claim 1, Takahashi teaches A method of processing a substrate, the method comprising:
providing the substrate on a stage [fig. 1, substrate support 16, para 36] of a substrate processing apparatus [fig. 1, apparatus 1, para 33]; and
processing the substrate [fig. 1, substrate W, para 35] on the stage (fig. 1, 16),
wherein the processing of the substrate comprises:
providing source power [fig. 1, power supply 74, para 62] to the substrate processing apparatus (fig. 1, apparatus 1); and
providing bias power [fig. 1, bias power supply 61/81, para 55/66] to the substrate processing apparatus (fig. 1, apparatus 1),
wherein the providing of the bias power to the substrate processing apparatus comprises:
providing a first non-sinusoidal wave to a plasma electrode [fig. 1, electrode 21c, para 65] of the stage [fig. 1, para 92; wherein fig. 3 illustrates the wave to be non-sinusoidal]; and
providing a second non-sinusoidal wave to an edge electrode [fig. 1, 22c] of the stage [fig. 1, para 94; wherein fig. 3 illustrates the wave to be non-sinusoidal], and
wherein a duty ratio of the second non-sinusoidal wave (fig. 5, DBE) is different from a duty ratio of the first non-sinusoidal wave (fig. 5, DB) [fig. 5, para 69; “The time length TAE may be the same as the time length TA as shown in FIG. 5 or different from the time length TA . In addition, the duty ratio DBE may be the same as or different from the duty ratio DB .”].
Regarding claim 2, Takahashi The method of claim 1,
wherein the edge electrode [Takahashi, fig. 1, 22c] has a ring shape [Takahashi, para 59, “The second region 22 is a substantially annular region.”] surrounding the plasma electrode (Takahashi, fig. 1, 21c; wherein para 59 states, “the second region 22 extends to surround the first region 21”).
Regarding claim 3, Takahashi The method of claim 1,
wherein the substrate processing apparatus further comprises
a focus ring [Takahashi, fig. 1, edge ring ER, para 59] surrounding the substrate (Takahashi, fig. 1, W) provided on the stage (Takahashi, fig. 1, support 16), and
wherein the edge electrode (Takahashi, fig. 1, 22c) is located under the focus ring (Takahashi, fig. 1, ER).
Regarding claim 4, Takahashi teaches The method of claim 1,
wherein each of the first non-sinusoidal wave and the second non-sinusoidal wave is a square wave [Takahashi, fig. 4, illustrates each wave VBW & VBE as square waves].
Regarding claim 5, Takahashi teaches The method of claim 1,
wherein a frequency of a micro pulse of the second non-sinusoidal wave ranges from 200 kHz to 600 kHz [para 68, “The bias frequency fBE is, for example, a frequency within a range of 200 kHz to 13.56 MHz.”].
Regarding claim 6, Takahashi teaches The method of claim 1,
wherein a micro pulse of the first non-sinusoidal wave and a micro pulse of the second non-sinusoidal wave have a common period [Takahashi, fig. 4; illustrates both micro pulses of each wave have the same period].
Regarding claim 8, Takahashi teaches The method of claim 1,
wherein each of the duty ratio of the first non-sinusoidal wave and the duty ratio of the second non-sinusoidal wave is constant [Takahashi, fig. 4, BE & BW duty ratios are constant.
Regarding claim 9, Takahashi teaches The method of claim 8,
wherein a period of the first non-sinusoidal wave [fig. 4, BW] comprises:
a first on-duration [fig. 4, PON] in which a first voltage [fig. 4, ON] is applied to the plasma electrode [fig. 1, 21c]; and
a first off-duration [fig. 4, POFF] in which a second voltage [fig. 4, OFF] is applied to the plasma electrode [fig. 1, 21c],
wherein a period of the second non-sinusoidal wave [fig. 4, BE] comprises:
a second on-duration [fig. 4, PON_E] in which a third voltage [fig. 4, ON] is applied to the edge electrode [fig. 4, 22C]; and
a second off-duration [fig. 4, POFF_E] in which a fourth voltage [fig. 1, power supply 74, para 62] not applied to the edge electrode (fig. 1, 22c), and
wherein the second on-duration overlaps in time with the first on-duration [fig. 4].
Regarding claim 10, Takahashi teaches The method of claim 9,
wherein the second on-duration starts with or later than the first on-duration [fig. 4], and
wherein the second on-duration ends with or before the first on-duration [fig. 4].
Regarding claim 11, Takahashi teaches The method of claim 1,
wherein the providing of the second non-sinusoidal wave [fig. 3/4, VBE/BE] comprises
changing the duty ratio or a peak amplitude of the second non-sinusoidal wave over time [fig 3/4, illustrate the peak amplitude of the second non-sinusoidal wave over time changes.].
Regarding claim 12, Takahashi teaches The method of claim 1,
wherein the providing of the source power [fig. 1, power supply 74, para 62] to the substrate processing apparatus [fig. 1, 1] comprises providing the source power to the stage [fig. 1, 16].
Regarding claim 20, Takahashi teaches A method of processing a substrate, the method comprising:
providing source power [fig. 1, power supply 57, para 71] to a substrate processing apparatus [fig. 1, apparatus 1, para 72];
providing a first non-sinusoidal wave [fig. 1, pulses BW, para 56] to the substrate processing apparatus (fig. 1, apparatus 1); and
providing a second non-sinusoidal wave [fig. 1, pulses BE, para 61] to the substrate processing apparatus (fig. 1, apparatus 1),
wherein the first non-sinusoidal wave (fig. 4, BW) comprises:
a first on-period [fig. 4, PON] in which a first voltage [fig. 4, ON] is applied to the substrate processing apparatus (fig. 1, apparatus 1); and
a first off-period [fig. 4, POFF] in which a second voltage [fig. 4, OFF] is applied to the substrate processing apparatus (fig. 1, apparatus 1),
wherein the second non-sinusoidal wave (fig. 4, BE) comprises:
a second on-period [fig. 4, PON_E] in which a third voltage [fig. 4, ON] is applied to the substrate processing apparatus (fig. 1, apparatus 1); and
a second off-period [fig. 4, POFF_E] in which a fourth voltage [fig. 4, OFF] is applied to the substrate processing apparatus (fig. 1, apparatus 1),
wherein the first on-period comprises the second on-period [fig. 4, wherein the first and second on period are the same].
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.
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) 7 & 13-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi & Koshimizu et al. (CN119173984A).
Regarding claim 7, Takahashi teaches The method of claim 1,
wherein a period of the first non-sinusoidal wave comprises:
a first on-duration in which a first voltage is applied to the plasma electrode; and
a first off-duration in which a second voltage is applied to the plasma electrode,
wherein a period of the second non-sinusoidal wave comprises:
a second on-duration in which a third voltage is applied to the edge electrode; and
a second off-duration in which a fourth voltage is applied to the edge electrode,
wherein the second voltage is a negative voltage [para 67, “In the embodiment, each of the plurality of bias pulses BE is a negative voltage pulse. In an example, the negative voltage pulse is a negative direct-current voltage pulse.”].
Takahashi fails to explicitly disclose wherein the duty ratio of the second non-sinusoidal wave is less than the duty ratio of the first non-sinusoidal wave.
However Koshimizu teaches wherein the duty ratio of the second non-sinusoidal wave [fig. 4, bias energy BE2] is less than the duty ratio of the first non-sinusoidal wave [fig. 4, bias energy BE1].
Therefore it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the duty ratio of the second wave to be less than the duty ratio of the first wave to mitigate profile defects and precise control of ion energy during manufacturing.
Regarding claim 13 Takahashi teaches A method of processing a substrate, the method comprising:
providing the substrate [fig. 1, substrate W, para 35] on a stage [fig. 1, substrate support 16, para 36] of a substrate processing apparatus [fig. 1, apparatus 1, para 33];
providing source power [fig. 1, power supply 57, para 49] to the substrate processing apparatus (fig. 1, apparatus 1) as a first macro pulse [wherein the source power is fixed constant power];
providing a first non-sinusoidal wave having a first micro pulse [fig. 1, power supply 61, para 92] to the substrate processing apparatus [fig. 1, apparatus 1, para 33]; and
providing a second non-sinusoidal wave having a second micro pulse [fig. 1, power supply 81, para 94; wherein fig. 4 illustrates non-sinusoidal wave] to the substrate processing apparatus (fig. 1, apparatus 1).
Takahashi fails to explicitly disclose wherein the duty ratio of the second micro pulse is less than the duty ratio of the first micro pulse.
However Koshimizu teaches wherein the duty ratio of the second micro pulse [fig. 4, bias energy BE2] is less than the duty ratio of the first micro pulse [fig. 4, bias energy BE1].
Therefore it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the duty ratio of the second micro pulse to be less than the duty ratio of the first micro pulse to mitigate profile defects and precise control of ion energy during manufacturing.
Regarding claim 14, Takahashi/Koshimizu teaches The method of claim 13,
wherein a period in which the first non-sinusoidal wave is provided corresponds to a period in which the second non-sinusoidal wave is provided [Takahashi, fig. 4, illustrates the first & second non-sinusoidal waves (BE & BW) are provided at the same time period].
Regarding claim 15, Takahashi/Koshimizu teaches The method of claim 13,
wherein a frequency of the first micro pulse ranges from 200 kHz to 600 kHz [para 57, “The bias frequency fB is, for example, a frequency within a range of 200 kHz to 13.56 MHz.”].
Regarding claim 16, Takahashi/XX teaches The method of claim 13,
wherein the first micro pulse and the second micro pulse have a common period [Takahashi, fig. 4 illustrates first and second micro pulse (BE & BW) have a common period].
Regarding claim 17, Takahashi/Koshimizu teaches The method of claim 13,
wherein the providing of the source power (Takahashi, fig. 1, RF),
the providing of the first non-sinusoidal wave (Takahashi, fig. 1, BW) and
the providing of the second non-sinusoidal wave (Takahashi, fig. 1, BE) are concurrently performed [Takahashi, fig. 4, illustrate concurrently performing].
Regarding claim 18, Takahashi/Koshimizu teaches The method of claim 13,
wherein the providing of the source power (Takahashi, fig. 1, RF power supply 57) comprises providing
a sinusoidal wave (Takahashi, fig. 4, RF) to the substrate processing apparatus (Takahashi, fig. 1, apparatus 1), and
wherein a frequency of the sinusoidal wave ranges from 20 MHz to 80 MHz [Takahashi, para 49, “the radio-frequency power RF has a frequency in a range of 27 MHz to 100 MHz, for example, a frequency of 40 MHz or 60 MHz.”].
Regarding claim 19, Takahashi/Koshimizu teaches The method of claim 13,
wherein the providing of the first non-sinusoidal wave (fig. 1, BW) comprises
providing the first non-sinusoidal wave (fig. 1, BW) to a plasma electrode [fig. 1, electrode 21c, para 65]of the substrate processing apparatus (fig. 1, apparatus 1), and
wherein the providing of the second non-sinusoidal wave (fig. 1, BE) comprises
providing the second non-sinusoidal wave (fig. 1, BE) to an edge electrode [fig. 1, electrode 22c, para 65] of the substrate processing apparatus (fig. 1, apparatus 1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FELIX B ANDREWS whose telephone number is (703)756-1074. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm ET.
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, William Partridge can be reached at 571-270-1402. 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.
/FELIX B ANDREWS/Examiner, Art Unit 2812
/William B Partridge/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights