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 specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
In claim 1, the limitation “means for flexibly adjusting the position and the orientation of at least one of the first magnetron and the second magnetron with respect to the surface of the component” does not have antecedent basis in the written description.
In claim 4, the limitation “through a dedicated adapter” lacks antecedent basis in the written description.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
In claim 1, the limitation “means for flexibly adjusting the position and the orientation of at least one of the first magnetron and the second magnetron with respect to the surface of the component” is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because it uses the word “means” modified by functional language (means for flexibly adjusting) and is not modified by sufficient structure for performing the claimed function. However, there is no disclosure of a “means for flexibly adjusting” in the written description or a recitation of a structure for performing the claimed function. Therefore, it is unclear what the limitation should be interpreted to require. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted to refer to any structure capable of performing the claimed function.
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 1-16 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.
In claim 1, the claim limitation “means for flexibly adjusting” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Specifically, the written description does not reference a “means for flexibly adjusting” or recite sufficient structure for performing the claimed function. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
In claim 4, the limitation “the coating chamber wall through a dedicated adapter” lacks antecedent basis and thus is indefinite because there is no previous recitation of a “coating chamber wall” and therefore it is unclear what wall is being referred to. Additionally, it is unclear what the limitation “through a dedicated adapter” is intended to require.
In claim 4, the limitation “preferably is a chamber wall” is indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation is intended to require that the component is a chamber wall or not.
In claim 12, the limitation “the interior” lacks antecedent basis and thus is indefinite because there is no previous recitation of an “interior” of the chamber and thus it is unclear what is being referred to. This rejection may be overcome by amending the claim to recite “an interior”.
Claims 2-3, 5-11 and 13-16 are indefinite by virtue of depending on an indefinite claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1-4, 7, 10-11, and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jeon (KR 20180086069 A).
Regarding claim 1, Jeon (KR 20180086069 A) teaches an apparatus for manufacturing semiconductors comprising a CVD reactor 1 (chamber), a sputtering device for high impulse magnetron sputtering comprising metal targets and ionizers (first and second magnetron) disposed within the chamber for supplying a coating material to a bell jar 20 (semiconductor equipment component) surface, wherein the bell jar 20 (component) is held by an outer rotating plate 141 (component holder) at least partially located within the chamber 1, wherein the ionizers (12, 13) (first and second magnetron) are configured to be positioned and oriented adjacent the surface of the bell jar to be coated and where the ionizers/magnetrons are capable/configured to move with respect to the outer rotating plate (component holder) using an inner rotating plate 142 (means for flexibly adjusting) and the component holder is configured to move with respect to the first and second magnetrons/ionizers during the coating process, wherein the inner rotating plate rotating the magnetrons relative to the bell jar amounts to adjusting the position and the orientation of at least one of the first magnetron and the second magnetron with respect to the surface of the component. (para 0001-0002, 0032-0033, 0039-0040, 0042-0044, 0046; Fig. 1). Additionally, or in the alternative, the metal ionizer 13 (second magnetron) may be moved up and down in addition to rotating, thus necessitating a means for adjusting the position and orientation of the second magnetron with respect to the bell jar (component) (para 0051).
Regarding claim 2, Jeon teaches the movement of the first magnetron and second magnetron with respect to the component holder is realized in that the outer rotating plate 141 (component holder) is configured in a fixed position outside of the targets and magnetrons and the first and second magnetron (ionizers) are configured to be moved within the chamber 1 relative to the component by the inner rotating plate 142 (para 0042-0044, 0047-0048; Fig. 1). Alternatively, or in addition, the apparatus of Jeon is necessarily capable of rotating the inner rotating plate while keeping the outer rotating plate (component holder) stationary/fixed.
Regarding claim 3, Jeon teaches the film can be formed through operation of the targets and ionizers (magnetrons) while the targets and magnetrons are rotating (para 0047-0048).
Regarding claim 4, Jeon teaches the component is a bell jar 20 (at least part of the coating chamber wall) connected to the CVD reactor 1 (chamber) through a water jacket 23 (dedicated adapter) (para 0038, 0045, 0052; Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 7, Jeon teaches the component is a bell jar 20 (liner) lining the inner surface of a CVD reactor 1 (chamber) (para 0045, 0052; Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 10, Jeon teaches the first and second ionizers/magnetrons (12, 13) are mounted on an inner rotating plate 142 (rotary assembly) (para 0042-0044, 0047-0048; Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 11, Jeon teaches the component holder is the outer rotating plate 141 (is a rotary assembly) (para 0042, 0046; Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 14, Jeon teaches the outer rotating plate 141 (component holder) extends through a wall of the CVD reactor 1 (chamber) (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 15, Jeon teaches the outer rotating plate 141 (component holder) forms at least part of a bottom wall of the CVD reactor 1 (chamber) (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 16, Jeon teaches the ionizers/magnetrons are configured to rotate with respect to the outer rotating plate 141 (component holder) and the component holder is configured to rotate with respect to the ionizers/magnetrons on the inner rotating plate 142 during coating of the bell jar 20 (component) (para 0042-0048; Fig. 1).
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-8, and 10-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon (KR 20180086069 A) in view of Herrera (US 6494999 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Jeon (KR 20180086069 A) teaches an apparatus for manufacturing semiconductors comprising a CVD reactor 1 (chamber), a sputtering device for high impulse magnetron sputtering comprising metal targets and ionizers (first and second magnetron) disposed within the chamber for supplying a coating material to a bell jar 20 (semiconductor equipment component) surface, wherein the bell jar 20 (component) is held by an outer rotating plate 141 (component holder) at least partially located within the chamber 1, wherein the ionizers (12, 13) (first and second magnetron) are configured to be positioned and oriented adjacent the surface of the bell jar to be coated and where the ionizers/magnetrons are capable/configured to move with respect to the outer rotating plate (component holder) using an inner rotating plate 142 (means for flexibly adjusting) and the component holder is configured to move with respect to the first and second magnetrons/ionizers during the coating process, wherein the inner rotating plate rotating the magnetrons relative to the bell jar amounts to adjusting the position and the orientation of at least one of the first magnetron and the second magnetron with respect to the surface of the component. (para 0001-0002, 0032-0033, 0039-0040, 0042-0044, 0046; Fig. 1). Additionally, or in the alternative, the metal ionizer 13 (second magnetron) may be moved up and down in addition to rotating, thus necessitating a means for adjusting the position and orientation of the second magnetron with respect to the bell jar (component) (para 0051).
Alternatively, Jeon fails to explicitly teach the ionizers are magnetrons. However, Herrera (US 6494999 B1), in the analogous art of magnetron sputtering, teaches a magnetron sputtering apparatus including a target assembly connected to a magnetron housing having a magnetron 145 for sputtering onto a substrate (col 19 line 49-67, col 20 line 1-5; Fig. 18). Jeon teaches the layers are formed by magnetron sputtering from a target (para 0021, 0032-0033, 0054). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a magnetron and magnetron housing, as described by Herrera, associated with each target of Jeon for performing magnetron sputtering.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Jeon and Herrera teaches the movement of the first magnetron and second magnetron with respect to the component holder is realized in that the outer rotating plate 141 (component holder) is configured in a fixed position outside of the targets and magnetrons and the first and second magnetron are configured to be moved within the chamber 1 relative to the component by the inner rotating plate 142 (Jeon para 0042-0044, 0047-0048; Fig. 1). Alternatively, or in addition, the apparatus of Jeon is necessarily capable of rotating the inner rotating plate while keeping the outer rotating plate (component holder) stationary/fixed.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Jeon and Herrera teaches the film can be formed through operation of the targets and magnetrons/ionizers while the targets and magnetrons are rotating (Jeon para 0047-0048).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Jeon and Herrera teaches the component is a bell jar 20 (at least part of the coating chamber wall) connected to the CVD reactor 1 (chamber) through a water jacket 23 (dedicated adapter) (Jeon para 0038, 0045, 0052; Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 6, the previous combination of Jeon and Herrera teaches each target has an individual magnetron (Herrera col 19 line 49-67, col 20 line 1-5; Fig. 18) and therefore the first and second magnetron operate as single magnetrons.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Jeon and Herrera teaches the component is a bell jar 20 (liner) lining the inner surface of a CVD reactor 1 (chamber) (Jeon para 0045, 0052; Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Jeon and Herrera teaches the component is a bell jar 20 (liner) lining the inner surface of the CVD reactor 1 (chamber) and the first and second magnetron associated with targets (T2, T3) are configured to be disposed adjacent a head portion 22 (inner surface) of the liner while a third and fourth magnetron associated with targets T1 are configured to be disposed adjacent to a wall portion 21 (outer surface) of the liner (Jeon para 0039, 0045, 0052; Fig. 1).
Alternatively, Jeon fails to explicitly teach multiple targets T1 adjacent to the wall; however, Jeon teaches multiple metal targets T2 and metal targets T3 (para 0022, 0025, 0039) and therefore the first magnetron and second magnetron may be interpreted as the magnetrons associated with the multiple targets T3 near the head portion 22 while the third and fourth magnetron are interpreted as the targets T1 and T2 adjacent to the wall portion 21.
Alternatively, or in addition, it would have been obvious to include an additional target T1 adjacent to the wall to increase deposition rate and because the mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Jeon and Herrera teaches the first and second ionizers/magnetrons (12, 13) are mounted on an inner rotating plate 142 (rotary assembly) (Jeon para 0042-0044, 0047-0048; Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Jeon and Herrera teaches the component holder is the outer rotating plate 141 (is a rotary assembly) (Jeon para 0042, 0046; Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Jeon and Herrera teaches the magnetrons contain a magnetron housing (internal volume) that is sealed from the vacuum pressure space and may be operated at ambient pressure (sealed from the interior of the chamber) (Herrera col 19 line 49-67, col 20 line 1-5, claim 16; Fig. 18).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Jeon and Herrera teaches the magnetron housings (internal volume) that is sealed from the vacuum pressure space and may be operated at ambient pressure while the chamber is at vacuum (maintained at atmospheric pressure when the chamber is maintained at vacuum) (Herrera col 19 line 49-67, col 20 line 1-5, claim 16; Fig. 18).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Jeon and Herrera teaches the outer rotating plate 141 (component holder) extends through a wall of the CVD reactor 1 (chamber) (Jeon Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Jeon and Herrera teaches the outer rotating plate 141 (component holder) forms at least part of a bottom wall of the CVD reactor 1 (chamber) (Jeon Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Jeon and Herrera teaches the ionizers/magnetrons are configured to rotate with respect to the outer rotating plate 141 (component holder) and the component holder is configured to rotate with respect to the ionizers/magnetrons on the inner rotating plate 142 during coating of the bell jar 20 (component) (Jeon para 0042-0048; Fig. 1).
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon (KR 20180086069 A) in view of Herrera (US 6494999 B1), as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of S Maul (US 20060046075 A1).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Jeon and Herrera fails to explicitly teach the component is an electrostatic chuck or a window. However, Jeon teaches the component is a bell jar (para 0021). However, Maul (US 20060046075 A1), in the analogous art of deposition, teaches a bell jar for CVD processes may be made of a transparent quartz glass (window) (para 0114). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the bell jar material of Jeon with the transparent quartz glass bell jar material of Maul because this is a substitution of known elements yielding predictable results.
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon (KR 20180086069 A) in view of Herrera (US 6494999 B1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sidhwa (US 20070032072 A1).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Jeon and Herrera fails to explicitly teach the magnetrons are used together with reactive gas to deposit a film of Al2O3, AlN, AlON, AlOF, Y2O3, YOF, YAG, YF3, Er2O3, ErOF, DLC, or doped DLC. However, Sidhwa (US 20070032072 A1), in the analogous art of deposition, teaches that a nucleation layer coating may be applied on the interior of a bell jar by sputtering in the presence of oxygen gas (reaction gas) where the deposited layer may be yttrium oxide (Y2O3) where the nucleation layer improves defect density of wafers pre-cleaned in the bell jar (Abstract, para 0032-0035). Jeon teaches depositing a reflective film on a bell jar interior surface (Jeon para 0021). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to sputter a Y2O3 film, as described by Sidhwa, on the inner surface of the bell jar of Jeon using the yttrium targets and oxygen reactive gas.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Portka (US 20190003039 A1) teaches a plurality of magnetron sputtering targets that may be tilted and positioned relative to a substrate surface, which broadly reads on claim 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK S OTT whose telephone number is (571)272-2415. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, James Lin can be reached at (571) 272-8902. 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.
/PATRICK S OTT/Examiner, Art Unit 1794