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 .
Claims 1-10 are pending in this application.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 07/10/2024 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 C.F.R. § 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS has/have been considered by the examiner.
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 5 and 9 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 5 recites the limitation “second groove” in lines 3 and 6 of the claim. There is no “first groove” claimed. It is unclear if there is one or two grooves being claimed. For the purposes of examination, “second groove” will be interpreted as the only one groove claimed.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “second seal member” in line 2 of the claim and “second space” in line 3 of the claim. There is no “first seal member” or “first space” claimed. It is unclear if there is one or two seal members and spaces being claimed. For the purposes of examination, “second seal member” will be interpreted as the only one seal member claimed and “second space” will be interpreted as the only one space claimed.
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) 1-3 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Parkhe U.S. Patent Application 2022/0270906 (hereinafter “Parkhe”).
Regarding claim 1, Parkhe teaches an electrostatic chuck (Refer to fig.1) comprising: a first base body (i.e. ceramic bottom plate 102)(fig.1); a first adhesive layer (i.e. bond layer 114)(fig.1); a second base body (i.e. ceramic top plate 108)(fig.1) stacked on the first base body (implicit) with the first adhesive layer interposed therebetween (implicit); and an electrostatic electrode (i.e. ESC electrodes 110)(fig.1) embedded in the second base body (implicit), wherein the first base body is made of aluminum oxide ceramics (refer to [0021]), and wherein the second base body is made of aluminum oxide ceramics (refer to [0021]) with a higher purity of aluminum oxide than that of the first base body (refer to [0021] and abstract).
Regarding claim 2, Parkhe teaches the electrostatic chuck according to claim 1, comprising: a conductor (i.e. heaters 104 and 106)(fig.1) embedded in the first base body (implicit).
Regarding claim 3, Parkhe teaches the electrostatic chuck according to claim 1, comprising: a first seal member (i.e. insulation 120)(fig.1), wherein an annular first space in which the first adhesive layer is not present is formed in a region where an outer peripheral portion of the first base body and an outer peripheral portion of the second base body face each other (implicit), and wherein the first seal member is disposed in the first space (implicit).
Regarding claim 7, Parkhe teaches a substrate fixing device comprising: a base plate (i.e. cooling base 122)(fig.1); a second adhesive layer (i.e. silicone bond 121)(fig.1); and the electrostatic chuck according to claim 1 mounted on the base plate with the second adhesive layer interposed therebetween (implicit).
Claim(s) 1, 2, 7, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Muramatsu et al. U.S. Patent Application 2022/0208593 (hereinafter “Muramatsu”).
Regarding claim 1, Muramatsu teaches an electrostatic chuck (refer to electrostatic chuck 30)(fig.1) comprising: a first base body (i.e. insulation layer 34)(fig.1); a first adhesive layer (i.e. thermal diffusion layer 33)(fig.1); a second base body (i.e. base body 31)(fig.1) stacked on the first base body (implicit) with the first adhesive layer interposed therebetween (implicit); and an electrostatic electrode (i.e. electrostatic electrode 32)(fig.1) embedded in the second base body (implicit), wherein the first base body is made of aluminum oxide ceramics (refer to [0032]: “fillers such as alumina and aluminum nitride are contained in the insulation layer 34”), and wherein the second base body is made of aluminum oxide ceramics (refer to [0027]) with a higher purity of aluminum oxide than that of the first base body (refer to [0032]: the aluminum oxide is used as a filler in the first base body and therefore the first base body has a higher purity of aluminum oxide since it isn’t made out of any other materials).
Regarding claim 2, Muramatsu teaches the electrostatic chuck according to claim 1, comprising: a conductor (i.e. heat generating body 35)(fig.1) embedded in the first base body (implicit).
Regarding claim 7, Muramatsu teaches a substrate fixing device (refer to fig.1) comprising: a base plate (i.e. base plate 10)(fig.1); a second adhesive layer (i.e. adhesive layer 20)(fig.1); and the electrostatic chuck according to claim 1 (refer to the rejection of claim 1 above)(refer also to electrostatic chuck 30)(fig.1) mounted on the base plate (implicit) with the second adhesive layer interposed therebetween (implicit).
Regarding claim 8, Muramatsu teaches the substrate fixing device according to claim 7, wherein the second adhesive layer is thicker than the first adhesive layer (refer to [0030] and [0025]).
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) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parkhe as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Muramatsu.
Regarding claim 8, Parkhe teaches the substrate fixing device according to claim 7; however, Parkhe does not teach wherein the second adhesive layer is thicker than the first adhesive layer. However, Muramatsu teaches wherein the second adhesive layer is thicker than the first adhesive layer (refer to [0030] and [0025]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Parkhe to include the thicknesses of the adhesive layers to provide the advantage of using multiple layers for the second adhesive layer to allow for reducing stress due to the larger difference of thermal expansion from the first base layer to the base plate (refer to Muramatsu [0025]).
Claim(s) 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parkhe as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hida et. al. U.S. Patent Application 2009/0243236 (hereinafter “Hida”).
Regarding claim 4, Parkhe teaches the electrostatic chuck according to claim 1, comprising: a first seal member (i.e. insulation 120)(fig.1); however, Parkhe does not teach wherein an annular first groove recessed in a direction away from the second base body is provided on an outer peripheral portion of the first base body, wherein an annular first space in which the first adhesive layer is not present is formed in a region where the first groove and an outer peripheral portion of the second base body face each other, and wherein the first seal member is disposed in the first space. However, Hida teaches wherein an annular first groove (i.e. groove 13)(fig.4B) recessed in a direction away from the second base body (i.e. electrostatic chuck layer 3)(fig.4B) is provided on an outer peripheral portion of the first base body (implicit), wherein an annular first space (refer to groove 13)(fig.4B) in which the first adhesive layer is not present (implicit) is formed in a region where the first groove and an outer peripheral portion of the second base body face each other (implicit), and wherein the first seal member is disposed in the first space (i.e. thermally sprayed ceramic layer 6)(fig.4D). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the chuck of Parkhe to include the groove of Hida to provide the advantage of increasing the strength of the seal member (refer to Hida [0018]).
Regarding claim 5, Parkhe teaches the electrostatic chuck according to claim 1, comprising: a first seal member (i.e. insulation 120)(fig.1); however, Parkhe does not teach wherein an annular second groove recessed in a direction away from the first base body is provided on an outer peripheral portion of the second base body, wherein an annular first space in which the first adhesive layer is not present is formed in a region where the second groove and an outer peripheral portion of the first base body face each other, and wherein the first seal member is disposed in the first space. However, Hida teaches wherein an annular second groove (i.e. groove 13)(fig.4B) recessed in a direction away from the first base body (i.e. heater layer 4)(fig.4B) is provided on an outer peripheral portion of the second base body (implicit), wherein an annular first space (refer to groove 13)(fig.4B) in which the first adhesive layer is not present is formed in a region where the second groove and an outer peripheral portion of the first base body face each other (implicit), and wherein the first seal member is disposed in the first space (i.e. thermally sprayed ceramic layer 6)(fig.4D). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the chuck of Parkhe to include the groove of Hida to provide the advantage of increasing the strength of the seal member (refer to Hida [0018]).
Regarding claim 6, Parkhe teaches the electrostatic chuck according to claim 1, comprising: a first seal member (i.e. insulation 120)(fig.1); however, Parkhe does not teach wherein an annular first groove recessed in a direction away from the second base body is provided on an outer peripheral portion of the first base body, wherein an annular second groove recessed in a direction away from the first base body is provided on an outer peripheral portion of the second base body, wherein an annular first space in which the first adhesive layer is not present is formed in a region where the first groove and the second groove face each other, and wherein the first seal member is disposed in the first space. However, Hida teaches wherein an annular first groove (i.e. groove 13)(fig.4B) recessed in a direction away from the second base body (i.e. electrostatic chuck layer 3)(fig.4B) is provided on an outer peripheral portion of the first base body (implicit), wherein an annular second groove (i.e. groove 13)(fig.4B) recessed in a direction away from the first base body (i.e. heater layer 4)(fig.4B) is provided on an outer peripheral portion of the second base body (implicit), wherein an annular first space in which the first adhesive layer is not present is formed in a region where the first groove and the second groove face each other (refer to groove 13)(fig.4B), and wherein the first seal member is disposed in the first space (i.e. thermally sprayed ceramic layer 6)(fig.4D). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the chuck of Parkhe to include the groove of Hida to provide the advantage of increasing the strength of the seal member (refer to Hida [0018]).
Claim(s) 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parkhe as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Parkhe U.S. Patent Application 2016/0276196 (hereinafter “Parkhe2”).
Regarding claim 9, Parkhe teaches the substrate fixing device according to claim 7; however, Parkhe does not teach the substrate fixing device comprising: a second seal member, wherein an annular second space in which the second adhesive layer is not present is formed in a region where an outer peripheral portion of the first base body and an outer peripheral portion of the base plate face each other, and wherein the second seal member is disposed in the second space. However, Parkhe2 teaches the substrate fixing device comprising: a second seal member (i.e. o-ring 240)(fig.2), wherein an annular second space (refer to space 242)(fig.2)(refer also to [0034]) in which the second adhesive layer is not present is formed in a region where an outer peripheral portion of the first base body and an outer peripheral portion of the base plate face each other (refer to [0034]), and wherein the second seal member is disposed in the second space (implicit)(refer to o-ring 240)(fig.2)(refer also to [0034]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Parkhe to include the second seal member of Parkhe2 to provide the advantage of protecting the bonding layer from exposure to the plasma environment (refer to Parkhe2 [0035]).
Regarding claim 10, Parkhe teaches the substrate fixing device according to claim 7; however, Parkhe does not teach wherein on a surface of the first base body facing the base plate, an outer peripheral portion and a central portion are on the same plane, and wherein on a surface of the base plate facing the first base body, an outer peripheral portion and a central portion are on the same plane. However, Parkhe2 teaches wherein on a surface of the first base body facing the base plate, an outer peripheral portion (refer to outer diameter 252)(fig.2)(refer also to [0034]) and a central portion (refer to outer periphery 250)(fig.2)(refer also to [0034]) are on the same plane (implicit)(refer to fig.2), and wherein on a surface of the base plate facing the first base body, an outer peripheral portion (refer to outer diameter 252)(fig.2)(refer also to [0034]) and a central portion (refer to outer periphery 250)(fig.2)(refer also to [0034]) are on the same plane (implicit)(refer to fig.2). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Parkhe to include the outer peripheral portions and the central portions on the same plane of Parkhe2 to provide the advantage of preventing loss of vacuum through a tight seal between the first base body layer and the base plate (refer to Parkhe2 [0034]).
Claim(s) 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muramatsu as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Parkhe2.
Regarding claim 9, Muramatsu teaches the substrate fixing device according to claim 7; however, Muramatsu does not teach the substrate fixing device comprising: a second seal member, wherein an annular second space in which the second adhesive layer is not present is formed in a region where an outer peripheral portion of the first base body and an outer peripheral portion of the base plate face each other, and wherein the second seal member is disposed in the second space. However, Parkhe2 teaches the substrate fixing device comprising: a second seal member (i.e. o-ring 240)(fig.2), wherein an annular second space (refer to space 242)(fig.2)(refer also to [0034]) in which the second adhesive layer is not present is formed in a region where an outer peripheral portion of the first base body and an outer peripheral portion of the base plate face each other (refer to [0034]), and wherein the second seal member is disposed in the second space (implicit)(refer to o-ring 240)(fig.2)(refer also to [0034]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Muramatsu to include the second seal member of Parkhe2 to provide the advantage of protecting the bonding layer from exposure to the plasma environment (refer to Parkhe2 [0035]).
Regarding claim 10, Muramatsu teaches the substrate fixing device according to claim 7; however, Muramatsu does not teach wherein on a surface of the first base body facing the base plate, an outer peripheral portion and a central portion are on the same plane, and wherein on a surface of the base plate facing the first base body, an outer peripheral portion and a central portion are on the same plane. However, Parkhe2 teaches wherein on a surface of the first base body facing the base plate, an outer peripheral portion (refer to outer diameter 252)(fig.2)(refer also to [0034]) and a central portion (refer to outer periphery 250)(fig.2)(refer also to [0034]) are on the same plane (implicit)(refer to fig.2), and wherein on a surface of the base plate facing the first base body, an outer peripheral portion (refer to outer diameter 252)(fig.2)(refer also to [0034]) and a central portion (refer to outer periphery 250)(fig.2)(refer also to [0034]) are on the same plane (implicit)(refer to fig.2). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Muramatsu to include the outer peripheral portions and the central portions on the same plane of Parkhe2 to provide the advantage of preventing loss of vacuum through a tight seal between the first base body layer and the base plate (refer to Parkhe2 [0034]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN J COMBER whose telephone number is (571)272-6133. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm EST.
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, Thienvu V. Tran can be reached at 571-270-1276. 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 J COMBER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838