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 .
The present Office Action is in response to Applicants’ filing of April 30, 2026. Claims 1-20 are presented for examination, with Claims 1 and 17 being in independent form.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on April 30, 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR2015-0039725-A (“Kim”), machine translation provided herewith, pinpoint citations are to the translation, in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0255525 (“Hammond”).
Regarding Claim 1, Kim discloses a computer program product for an impedance matching and power distribution network (Fig. 1, details in Fig. 2, algorithms in Figs. 3-5; [0004]; [0009]; [0046]; [0079]-[0080]; [0086]; [0091]; [0098]; [0104]), the computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer readable medium on which is provided computer-executable instructions (using impedance matching control unit 138 and control unit 112) for:
obtaining, at a present time, present values of variable reactances associated with a station of a process chamber, wherein the variable reactances are associated with a first feedback control system for performing impedance matching for the process chamber (140, 132, 134; [0102]-[0104]), and wherein frequency tuning is being performed on an RF generator of the process chamber in association with a second feedback control system for performing impedance matching for the process chamber ([0088]; [0094]-[0098]); and
determining updated values of the variable reactances for the station to be utilized in connection with the first feedback control system based at least in part on an error associated with the second feedback control system, wherein the error is determined based on a difference between a target frequency and measured frequencies ([0009]; [0091]; [0098]; [0179]-[0184]).
Kim does not specifically disclose the newly added limitations regarding the process chamber comprising a plurality of stations and that the error is determined at each station.
However, Hammond, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the process chamber comprising a plurality of stations and that the error is determined at each station (122a-d in Fig. 7; [0043]-[0044]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided the process chamber as disclosed by Kim with the duplication of stations as taught by Hammond, in order to use a single generator to couple to multiple process chambers, as evidenced by Hammond ([0043]).
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Kim in view of Hammond further teaches wherein the error associated with the measured frequencies at each station of the plurality of station are averaged to determine the error ([0014]-[0018] of Kim).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Kim in view of Hammond further teaches wherein the measured frequency at each station is determined using one or more sensing circuits (136, 138; [0094]-[0095] of Kim).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Kim in view of Hammond further teaches wherein the updated values of the variable reactances are usable to modify positions of one or more variable reactance elements associated with the process chamber to minimize reflected power associated with the station ([0079]-[0080]; [0093]-[0094]; [0199] of Kim).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Kim in view of Hammond further teaches wherein the one or more variable reactance elements comprise at least one of: a series capacitor, or a shunt capacitor (132.134 in Figs. 1-2 of Kim).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Kim in view of Hammond further teaches wherein modifying the positions of the one or more variable reactance elements associated with the first feedback control system causes the second feedback control system to drive the measured frequency at the station toward a target frequency ([0046]-0048]; [0067]-[0069]; [0091]-[0093] of Kim).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Kim in view of Hammond further teaches wherein the target frequency corresponds to a frequency specified for a step of a recipe performed at the present time ([0125]; [0222]-[0223] of Kim).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Kim in view of Hammond further teaches wherein the computer-executable instructions are further configured for determining positions of one or more variable reactance elements using a calibration table and based at least in part on the updated values of the variable reactances (Fig. 4; [0008]-[0013]; [0028]-[0029]; [0044]-0047]; [0094]; [0189]-[0193] of Kim).
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Kim in view of Hammond further teaches wherein the variable reactances comprise a series reactance associated with the station of the process chamber (132,134,140 in Figs. 1-2 of Kim, and their corresponding description).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Kim in view of Hammond further teaches wherein the variable reactances comprise a shunt reactance associated with the process chamber (132,134,140 in Figs. 1-2 of Kim, and their corresponding description).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Kim in view of Hammond further teaches wherein the variable reactances comprise a variable series reactance, and wherein an updated series reactance is determined based on a correction to a target series reactance, wherein the correction incorporates the error associated with the second feedback control system (132; [0020]-[0042]; [0094]-[0125] of Kim).
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of Kim in view of Hammond further teaches wherein the variable reactances comprise a variable shunt reactance, and wherein an updated shunt reactance is determined without determining a target shunt reactance and based at least in part on the error associated with the second feedback control system ([0010]-[0012]; [0020]-[0042]; [0094]-[0125] of Kim).
Regarding Claim 13, the combination of Kim in view of Hammond further teaches wherein the updated values of the variable reactances are utilized by the first feedback control system responsive to one or more criteria being met (Fig. 3; [0022]-[0046]; [0115]-[0125] of Kim).
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Kim in view of Hammond further teaches wherein the one or more criteria comprise: a reflected power associated with the process chamber exceeding a reflected power threshold, a power balance ratio associated with a plurality of stations of the process chamber exceeding a power balance threshold, and the error associated with the second feedback control system exceeding an error threshold (Fig. 3; [0022]-[0046]; [0115]-[0125] of Kim).
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of Kim in view of Hammond further teaches wherein the updated values of the variable reactances are modified prior to use responsive to a determination that a difference between the present values of the variable reactances and the updated values of the variable reactances are within a dither threshold (Fig. 3; [0121]-[0124]; [0134] of Kim).
Regarding Claim 16, the combination of Kim in view of Hammond further teaches wherein the determining the updated values of the variable reactances for the station based at least in part on the error associated with the second feedback control system is responsive to a determination that a mode associated with controlling the first feedback control system based on the error associated with the second feedback control system has been activated in a recipe being utilized at the present time (Fig. 3; [0007]; [0022]-[0046]; [0115]-[0125]; [0222]-[0229] of Kim).
Regarding Claim 17, Kim discloses a method for impedance matching and power distribution (Fig. 1, details in Fig. 2, algorithms in Figs. 3-5; [0004]; [0009]; [0046]; [0079]-[0080]; [0086]; [0091]; [0098]; [0104]), comprising:
obtaining, at a present time, present values of variable reactances associated with a station of a process chamber, wherein the variable reactances are associated with a first feedback control system for performing impedance matching for the process chamber (140, 132, 134; [0102]-[0104]), and wherein frequency tuning is being performed on an RF generator of the process chamber in association with a second feedback control system for performing impedance matching for the process chamber ([0088]; [0094]-[0098]); and
determining updated values of the variable reactances for the station to be utilized in connection with the first feedback control system based at least in part on an error associated with the second feedback control system, wherein the error is determined based on a difference between a target frequency and measured frequencies ([0009]; [0091]; [0098]; [0179]-[0184]).
Kim does not specifically disclose the newly added limitations regarding the process chamber comprising a plurality of stations and that the error is determined at each station.
However, Hammond, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the process chamber comprising a plurality of stations and that the error is determined at each station (122a-d in Fig. 7; [0043]-[0044]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided the process chamber as disclosed by Kim with the duplication of stations as taught by Hammond, in order to use a single generator to couple to multiple process chambers, as evidenced by Hammond ([0043]).
Regarding Claim 18, the combination of Kim in view of Hammond further teaches wherein the measured frequencies at each station of the plurality of stations are averaged to determine the error ([0014]-[0018] of Kim).
Regarding Claim 19, the combination of Kim in view of Hammond further teaches wherein the measured frequency at the station is determined using one or more sensing circuits (136, 138; [0094]-[0095] of Kim).
Regarding Claim 20, the combination of Kim in view of Hammond further teaches wherein the updated values of the variable reactances are usable to modify positions of one or more variable reactance elements associated with the process chamber to minimize reflected power associated with the station ([0079]-[0080]; [0093]-[0094]; [0199] of Kim).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/00317768 (“Maw”) relates to system and methods for variable gain tuning of matching networks.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0253184 (Marakhtanov”) relates to a uniformity control circuit for impedance match.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PEDRO C FERNANDEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7050. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5 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, Alexander H Taningco can be reached at 1-(571) 272-8048. 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.
/PEDRO C FERNANDEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/ALEXANDER H TANINGCO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights