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 1-20 are pending in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 08/28/2024 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 § 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) 1, 3-6, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawasaki et al. Chinese Patent Document CN 102668060 A (hereinafter “Kawasaki”) and further in view of Park et al. Chinese Patent Document CN 105474381 A (hereinafter “Park”).
Regarding claim 1, Kawasaki teaches an apparatus (refer to fig.4), comprising: a susceptor plate (i.e. table main body 59)(fig.4) comprising a first surface (refer to top of 59)(fig.4) and a second surface (refer to bottom of 59)(fig.4); a cap (i.e. heat diffusion plate 61)(fig.4) removably disposed on the first surface of the susceptor plate (refer to fig.5); an air gap (refer to gas diffusion chamber 88)(fig.4) between the first surface of the susceptor plate and the cap (refer to fig.4); a plurality of electrodes (i.e. electrode 66)(fig.4) embedded within the cap (refer to fig.4); a first electrical interconnect (i.e. supply bar 78)(fig.4) embedded within the susceptor plate (refer to fig.4); and a second electrical interconnect (i.e. connection terminal 78A)(fig.4) configured to electrically connect the plurality of electrodes to the first electrical interconnect (refer to [0054]); however, Kawasaki does not teach the first electrical interconnect extending through the first and second surfaces. However, Park teaches the first electrical interconnect (refer to plug connector 1010)(fig.10) extending through the first (i.e. first end 1002)(fig.10) and second surface (i.e. second end 1004)(fig.10). 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 apparatus of Kawasaki to include the interconnect of Park to provide the advantage of providing a simple removable connector to reliably connect and disconnect the power to the electrode/cap when the cap is removed/connected to the susceptor.
Regarding claim 3, Kawasaki and Park teach the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the cap is formed from a ceramic material (refer to Kawasaki [0046]).
Regarding claim 4, Kawasaki and Park teach the apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising a heating element (i.e. Kawasaki heating unit 64)(fig.4) embedded within the susceptor plate (refer to Kawasaki [0047] and fig.4).
Regarding claim 5, Kawasaki and Park teach the apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising a shaft (refer to Kawasaki support tube cover 65 and strut tube 60)(fig.4) coupled to the second surface of the susceptor plate (refer to Kawasaki fig.4), wherein the shaft comprises a hollow interior (refer to Kawasaki [0045] and fig.4).
Regarding claim 6, Kawasaki and Park teach the apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the first electrical interconnect extends into the hollow interior of the shaft (implicit)(refer to Kawasaki fig.4).
Regarding claim 9, Kawasaki and Park teach the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the susceptor plate further comprises a plurality of through-holes (refer to Kawasaki through holes 84 and 86)(fig.4) extending from the first surface to the second surface (implicit)(refer to Kawasaki fig.4), wherein each through-hole is fluidly connected to an inert gas supply (refer to Kawasaki [0095]).
Claim(s) 2 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawasaki and Park as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sansoni et a. U.S. Patent Application 2010/0039747 (hereinafter “Sansoni”).
Regarding claim 2, Kawasaki and Park teach the apparatus according to claim 1; however, they do not teach wherein the susceptor plate is formed from a metal material. However, Sansoni teaches wherein the susceptor plate is formed from a metal material (refer to [0069]). 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 susceptor plate of Kawasaki and Park to include the metal material of Sansoni to provide the advantage of improving thermal conductivity (refer to Sansoni [0069]).
Regarding claim 7, Kawasaki and Park teach the apparatus according to claim 1; however, they do not teach wherein the susceptor plate is formed from a ceramic material. However, Sansoni teaches wherein the susceptor plate is formed from a ceramic material (refer to [0069]). 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 apparatus of Kawasaki and Park to include the ceramic material of Sansoni to provide the advantage of using a material with a similar coefficient of thermal expansion as the cap to prevent cracking/damage to the cap and/or susceptor.
Claim(s) 8, 10, and 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawasaki and Park as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kannan U.S. Patent Application 2005/0011441.
Regarding claim 8, Kawasaki and Park teach the apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising a dielectric spacer (i.e. Kawasaki contact protrusion 89)(fig.4) arranged between the first surface of the susceptor plate and the cap (implicit)(refer to Kawasaki fig.4), wherein the dielectric spacers form an air gap (refer to Kawasaki gas diffusion chamber 88)(fig.4) between the first surface of the susceptor plate and the cap (implicit)(refer to Kawasaki fig.4); however, they do not teach wherein the dielectric spacer is a plurality of dielectric spacers. However, Kannan teaches wherein the dielectric spacer is a plurality of dielectric spacers (refer to support members 30)(fig.3). 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 apparatus of Kawasaki and Park to include the plurality of dielectric spacers of Kannan to provide the advantage of providing more stable and stronger support.
Regarding claim 10, Kawasaki teaches an apparatus (refer to fig.4), comprising: a susceptor plate (i.e. table main body 59)(fig.4) comprising a first surface (refer to top of 59)(fig.4) and a second surface (refer to bottom of 59)(fig.4); a cap (i.e. heat diffusion plate 61)(fig.4) removably disposed on the first surface of the susceptor plate (refer to fig.5); a dielectric spacer (i.e. Kawasaki contact protrusion 89)(fig.4) arranged between the first surface of the susceptor plate and the cap (implicit)(refer to Kawasaki fig.4), wherein the dielectric spacers form an air gap (refer to Kawasaki gas diffusion chamber 88)(fig.4) between the first surface of the susceptor plate and the cap (implicit)(refer to Kawasaki fig.4); a plurality of electrodes (i.e. electrode 66)(fig.4) embedded within the cap (refer to fig.4); and an electrical interconnect (i.e. supply bar 78 and connection terminal 78A)(fig.4); however, Kawasaki does not teach wherein the dielectric spacer is a plurality of dielectric spacers; an electrical port embedded within the susceptor plate; and an electrical plug connected to the plurality of electrodes, wherein the electrical plug is configured to electrically connect to the electrical port. However, Park teaches an electrical port (i.e. socket 1022)(fig.10) embedded within the susceptor plate (i.e. cooling base place 130)(fig.10); and an electrical plug (i.e. pin 1012)(fig.10) connected to the plurality of electrodes (implicit), wherein the electrical plug is configured to electrically connect to the electrical port (implicit). 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 apparatus of Kawasaki to include the electrical port and plug of Park to provide the advantage of providing a simple removable connector to reliably connect and disconnect the power to the electrode/cap when the cap is removed/connected to the susceptor. However, Kawasaki and Park do not teach wherein the dielectric spacer is a plurality of dielectric spacers. However, Kannan teaches wherein the dielectric spacer is a plurality of dielectric spacers (refer to support members 30)(fig.3). 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 apparatus of Kawasaki and Park to include the plurality of dielectric spacers of Kannan to provide the advantage of providing more stable and stronger support.
Regarding claim 12, Kawasaki, Park, and Kannan teach the apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the cap is formed from a ceramic material (refer to Kawasaki [0046]).
Regarding claim 13, Kawasaki, Park, and Kannan teach the apparatus according to claim 10, further comprising a heating element (i.e. Kawasaki heating unit 64)(fig.4) embedded within the susceptor plate (refer to Kawasaki [0047] and fig.4).
Regarding claim 14, Kawasaki, Park, and Kannan teach the apparatus according to claim 10, further comprising a shaft (refer to Kawasaki support tube cover 65 and strut tube 60)(fig.4) coupled to the second surface of the susceptor plate (refer to Kawasaki fig.4), wherein the shaft comprises a hollow interior (refer to Kawasaki [0045] and fig.4).
Regarding claim 15, Kawasaki, Park, and Kannan teach the apparatus according to claim 10, wherein at least a portion of the electrical plug is encapsulated with an insulating material (refer to Kawasaki connection terminal 78A and heat diffusion plate 61)(fig.4).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawasaki, Park, and Kannan as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Sansoni.
Regarding claim 11, Kawasaki, Park, and Kannan teach the apparatus according to claim 10; however, they do not teach wherein the susceptor plate is formed from a metal material. However, Sansoni teaches wherein the susceptor plate is formed from a metal material (refer to [0069]). 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 susceptor plate of Kawasaki, Park, and Kannan to include the metal material of Sansoni to provide the advantage of improving thermal conductivity (refer to Sansoni [0069]).
Claim(s) 16, 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sansoni and further in view of Kannan.
Regarding claim 16, Sansoni teaches a system (refer to fig.1 and 5A), comprising: a reaction chamber (i.e. chamber 100)(fig.1) comprising an interior space (i.e. interior volume 120)(fig.1); a susceptor assembly (i.e. puck 150)(figs.1 and 5A) disposed within the interior space (refer to fig.1), and comprising: a susceptor plate (i.e. lower puck plate 550B)(fig.5A) formed from a metal material (refer to [0069]) and comprising a first surface (refer to top of lower puck plate 550B)(fig.5A) and a second surface (refer to bottom of lower puck plate 550B)(fig.5A); a cap (i.e. upper puck plate 550A)(fig.5A) disposed on the susceptor plate (refer to fig.5A) and formed from a ceramic material (refer to [0069]); spacer (refer to bonding region 504)(fig.5A) arranged between the first surface of the susceptor plate and the cap (refer to fig.5A), wherein the spacers form an air gap (i.e. gap G)(fig.5A) between the first surface of the susceptor plate and the cap (refer to gap G)(fig.5A); a plurality of electrodes (i.e. electrode 159)(fig.5A) embedded within the cap (refer to electrode 159)(fig.5A); and an electrical interconnect (i.e. interconnect in the figure below)(fig.5A) extending through the first and second surfaces of the susceptor plate (refer to interconnect in the figure below)(fig.5A), wherein the electrical interconnect is configured to electrically connect to the plurality of electrodes (refer to electrode 159 and chucking power source 140)(fig.5A); however, Sansoni does not teach the spacer being a plurality of spacers. However, Kannan teaches wherein the spacer is a plurality of spacers (refer to support members 30)(fig.3). 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 system of Sansoni to include the plurality of dielectric spacers of Kannan to provide the advantage of providing more stable and stronger support.
PNG
media_image1.png
506
714
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 17, Sansoni and Kannan teach the system according to claim 16, wherein the susceptor plate further comprises a through- hole (i.e. Sansoni through-hole in the figure above)(fig.5) extending from the first surface to the second surface (implicit)(refer to Sansoni fig.5A), and wherein the electrical interconnect is disposed within the through-hole (implicit)(refer to Sansoni interconnect in the figure above)(fig.5A).
Regarding claim 18, Sansoni and Kannan teach the system according to claim 16; however, they do not teach wherein each spacer has a width no greater than 1mm. However, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have wherein each spacer has a width no greater than 1mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. 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 system of Sansoni and Kannan to include wherein each spacer has a width no greater than 1mm to provide the advantage of keeping the spacer small enough to not obstruct airflow.
Regarding claim 20, Sansoni and Kannan teach the system according to claim 16, wherein the susceptor plate further comprises a plurality of through-holes extending from the first surface to the second surface (refer to Sansoni [0009])(refer also to Sansoni gas supply 141)(fig.5A), wherein each through-hole is fluidly connected to an inert gas supply (refer to Sansoni gas supply 141)(fig.5A).
Claim(s) 17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sansoni and Kannan as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Kawasaki.
Regarding claim 19, Sansoni and Kannan teach the system according to claim 16; however, they do not teach the system further comprising a heating element embedded within the susceptor plate. However, Kawasaki teaches the system further comprising a heating element (i.e. heating unit 64)(fig.4) embedded within the susceptor plate (refer to heating unit 64)(fig.4). 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 system of Sansoni and Kannan to include the heating element of Kawasaki to provide the advantage of providing temperature control.
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
Prosecution Insights