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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Supporting parts (any structure that supports, due to lack of disclosure of corresponding structure in the specification, para. [0041]) in claim 12.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim 14 is 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 14 recites the limitation "wherein a passivation layer is formed on a peripheral surface of the susceptor and exposed the upper surface of the susceptor where the patterned coating film is formed" in the claim. Claim 14 contradicts Claim 1 in that Claim 1 recites “wherein the patterned coating film is continuously and entirely distributed on the upper surface of the susceptor toward the semiconductor wafer,” yet Claim 14 recites that parts of the upper surface of the susceptor is exposed. Examiner interprets broadly. Appropriate clarification is requested.
Claim 15 is 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 15 recites the limitation "wherein the pattern is corresponding to a patterned mask to form the patterned coating film” in the claim. It is unclear if the limitation “a patterned mask” is a part of the apparatus or not, as the recitation is not positively recited in the claim. Examiner interprets broadly. Appropriate clarification is requested.
Claim 18 is 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 18 recites the limitation "wherein the passivation layer and the patterned coating film are continuously and entirely distributed on the upper surface of the susceptor toward the semiconductor wafer” in the claim. It is unclear if both the passivation layer and the patterned coating film as a total are entirely distributed on the upper surface of the susceptor, or if the passivation layer and the patterned coating film are each individually entirely distributed on the upper surface of the susceptor. Examiner interprets as the former (both as a total). Appropriate clarification is requested.
Claim limitation “supporting parts” 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. The disclosure is devoid of any structure that performs the function in the claim. 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-7, 10-11, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 5782979 to Kaneno in view of US 20220076988 to Chen, and further in view of US 5551983 to Shepard.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 10-11: Kaneno discloses a semiconductor wafer carrier structure, comprising: a carrier body (200 [susceptor], Fig. 15A-C) having a surface (surface of 200); a protective film covering the surface (300 [substrate holder]); a susceptor (600b [wafer tray]) disposed on the carrier body (200) having an upper surface (upper surface of 600b).
However Kaneno does not disclose wherein the upper surface of the susceptor appears to be a planar surface and a patterned coating film formed on the upper surface of the susceptor and configured to directly face a semiconductor wafer, wherein a material of the patterned coating film is different from a material of the susceptor, wherein the patterned coating film has two or more different thicknesses and is with a pattern, so that the semiconductor wafer is at least locally separated from the patterned coating film due to the pattern,
wherein the patterned coating film is continuously and entirely distributed on the upper surface of the susceptor toward the semiconductor wafer, and the upper surface of the susceptor is separated from the semiconductor wafer by the patterned coating film.
Chen discloses wherein the upper surface of the susceptor (516 [surface] of 502 [susceptor substrate], Fig. 5C) appears to be a planar surface (Fig. 5C) and a patterned coating film (504 [coating layer]) formed on the upper surface of the susceptor (502) and configured to directly face a semiconductor wafer (W [wafer]), wherein a material of the patterned coating film (para. [0045]) is different from a material of the susceptor (para. [0040]), wherein the patterned coating film (504) is continuously and entirely distributed on the upper surface of the susceptor (para. [0045-0046]) toward the semiconductor wafer (W), and the upper surface of the susceptor (516 of 502) is separated from the semiconductor wafer (W) by the patterned coating film (504), for the purpose of alleviating warpage and bowing while meeting the requirements of the size, weight, and designs (para. [0004]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the limitations above as taught by Chen with motivation to alleviate warpage and bowing while meeting the requirements of the size, weight, and designs.
The apparatus of Kaneno in view of Chen does not disclose (claim 1) wherein the patterned coating film has two or more different thicknesses and is with a pattern, so that the semiconductor wafer is at least locally separated from the patterned coating film due to the pattern; (claim 2) wherein the pattern of the patterned coating film is symmetrically distributed with respect to a center of the susceptor; (claim 3) wherein the patterned coating film is defined with a reference surface, and the patterned coating film further comprises a protrusive portion with a top surface above the reference surface, a depressed portion with a top surface below the reference surface, or a combination thereof;
(claim 5) wherein the protrusive portion comprises a first protrusive portion and a second protrusive portion surrounding the first protrusive portion; (claim 6) wherein the first protrusive portion covers a center of the susceptor; (claim 7) wherein the second protrusive portion is disposed annularly on the susceptor; (claim 10) wherein the patterned coating film is formed of a single material and with various thicknesses; (claim 11) wherein a thickness of the patterned coating film varies in a step-shape manner.
Shepard discloses (claim 1) wherein the patterned coating film (120, Fig. 3-10) has two or more different thicknesses (thickness of 120, Fig. 3-10, 13-14) and is with a pattern (Fig. 3-10, 13-14), so that the semiconductor wafer (170 [substrate]) is at least locally separated from the patterned coating film due to the pattern (Fig. 3-10); (claim 2) wherein the pattern of the patterned coating film (patterns of 120, Fig. 3-9) is symmetrically distributed with respect to a center of the susceptor (c. 5, l. 52-60); (claim 3) wherein the patterned coating film (120, Fig. 3-10) is defined with a reference surface (interpreted as bottom of 124, grooves]), and the patterned coating film (120) further comprises a protrusive portion (tops of 124) with a top surface above the reference surface (bottoms of 124), a depressed portion with a top surface below the reference surface, or a combination thereof;
(claim 5) wherein the protrusive portion (tops of 124, Fig. 5-6) comprises a first protrusive portion (center of 120) and a second protrusive portion (tops of annular 124’s) surrounding the first protrusive portion (center of 120); (claim 6) wherein the first protrusive portion (center of 120, Fig. 5-6) covers a center of the susceptor (center of 120); (claim 7) wherein the second protrusive portion (tops of annular 124’s, Fig. 5-6) is disposed annularly on the susceptor (110, see Fig. 5-6); (claim 10) wherein the patterned coating film (120, Fig. 3-10, 13-14) is formed of a single material (120) and with various thicknesses (at least two are shown in Fig. 5-6); (claim 11) wherein a thickness of the patterned coating film (thickness of 120, Fig. 3-10, 13-14) varies in a step-shape manner (see Fig. 5-6 where at least 1 step-shape is disclosed, or Fig. 13 where varied steps are disclosed). Shepard discloses the above limitations for the purpose of achieving variation in thermal conductivity in the thickness direction (col. 5, lines 33-55).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the pattern requirements as taught by Shepard with motivation to achieve variation in thermal conductivity in the thickness direction.
Claim 17: The apparatus of Kaneno in view of Chen, Shepard discloses a metal-organic chemical vapor deposition device (“MOCVD reactor,” Kaneno), comprising: a chamber (“reactor”, see Fig. 11-12); the semiconductor wafer carrier structure (1 [substrate holder]) as claimed in claim 1 (see claim 1) placed in the chamber (“reactor”); a support member (8) for supporting the semiconductor wafer carrier structure (1); and a heater (9 heater]) disposed below the semiconductor wafer carrier structure (1) for heating the semiconductor wafer carrier structure (1, col. 1, lines 15-35).
Claim(s) 4, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneno in view of Chen, Shepard as applied to claims 1-3, 5-7, 10-11, 17 above, and further in view of US 20120003599 to Patalay.
Claims 4, 8: The apparatus of Kaneno in view of Chen, Shepard (claim 4) wherein the protrusive portion is considered capable to be configured to increase a temperature in one area of the upper surface, and the depressed portion is configured to decrease a temperature in another area of the upper surface; (claim 8) wherein the depressed portion is located between the first protrusive portion and the second protrusive portion and surrounds the first protrusive portion, and the second protrusive portion and the depressed portion are both in an annular shape
Patalay discloses (claim 4) wherein the protrusive portion (222 [at least one peak], Fig. 2A/2B) is configured to increase a temperature in one area of the upper surface (upper surface of 216 [baseline profile]), and the depressed portion (224 [valley]) is configured to decrease a temperature in another area of the upper surface (upper surface of 216, para. [0019-0022]); (claim 8) wherein the depressed portion (224) is located between the first protrusive portion (central 222) and the second protrusive portion (another 222) and surrounds the first protrusive portion (central 222), and the second protrusive portion (another 222) and the depressed portion (a 224 between two 222’s) are both in an annular shape (Fig. 2A); for the purpose of providing a desired temperature profile to a substrate disposed on the substrate support (para. [0004]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the limitations above as taught by Patalay with motivation to provide a desired temperature profile to a substrate disposed on the substrate support.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneno in view of Chen, Shepard as applied to claims 1-3, 5-7, 10-11, 17 above, and further in view of US 20170352575 to Gangakhedkar.
Claim 9: The apparatus of Kaneno in view of Chen, Shepard does not disclose wherein the patterned coating film forms only a depressed portion without protruding.
Gangakhedkar discloses wherein the patterned component (500, Fig. 18A-18B) forms only a depressed portion (520, 530, 540 [zones]) without protruding (Fig. 18B, para. [0082]) for the purpose of giving clear thermal signatures (hot or cold) areas that can be compensated for thermal or film thickness uniformity (para. [0082]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the limitation above as taught by Gangakhedkar with motivation to give clear thermal signatures (hot or cold) areas that can be compensated for thermal or film thickness uniformity.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneno in view of Chen, Shepard as applied to claims 1-3, 5-7, 10-11, 17 above, and further in view of US 20090293647 to Muneishi.
Claim 12: The apparatus of Kaneno in view of Chen, Shepard does not disclose wherein the susceptor has a plurality of supporting parts protruding from the upper surface and located at an edge of the susceptor, and wherein a top of each of the supporting parts is higher than a top of the patterned coating film in a thickness direction of the susceptor.
Muneishi discloses wherein the susceptor (100 [sample holder], Fig. 1) has a plurality of supporting parts (1 [convex parts]) protruding from the upper surface and located at an edge of the susceptor (Fig. 2A), and wherein a top of each of the supporting parts (top of 1) is higher than a top of the patterned coating film (3 [joining layer]) in a thickness direction of the susceptor (100), for the purpose of improving flatness of the sample, which can contribute to accuracy enhancement of processing and observation of the sample (para. [0030]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the supporting parts as taught by Muneishi with motivation to improve flatness of the sample, which can contribute to accuracy enhancement of processing and observation of the sample.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneno in view of Chen, Shepard as applied to claims 1-3, 5-7, 10-11, 17 above, and further in view of US 20120252220 to Harada.
Claim 13: The apparatus of Kaneno in view of Chen, Shepard does not disclose wherein a ratio of a diameter of the patterned coating film at a center of the susceptor to a diameter of the susceptor ranges from greater than 0 to less than 1/3.
Harada discloses wherein a ratio of a diameter of the patterned coating film at a center of the susceptor (d [pitch circle diameter], Fig. 2, para. [0071]) to a diameter of the susceptor (200-450 mm, para. [0062]) ranges from greater than 0 to less than 1/3 (less than 1/3 or 32% at 450mm size susceptor and 145 mm d), for the purpose of reducing particles on the rear surface of the wafer by lowering the contact pressure (para. [0073]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the ratio requirements as taught by Harada with motivation to reduce particles on the rear surface of the wafer by lowering the contact pressure.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneno in view of Chen, Shepard as applied to claims 1-3, 5-7, 10-11, 17 above, and further in view of US 20050193951 to Furuse.
Claim 14: The apparatus of Kaneno in view of Chen, Shepard does not disclose wherein a passivation layer is formed on a peripheral surface of the susceptor and exposed the upper surface of the susceptor where the patterned coating film is formed, and a material of the passivation layer is different from a material of the patterned coating film.
Furuse discloses wherein a passivation layer (3 [cover], Fig. 2) is formed on a peripheral surface of the susceptor (150) and exposed the upper surface of the susceptor where the patterned coating film (2 [dielectric film]) is formed (Fig. 3) and a material of the passivation layer (3, alumina, para. [0034]) is different from a material of the patterned coating film (2 which can be a synthetic resin), for the purpose of protecting the dielectric film (para. [0034]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the passivation layer as taught by Furuse with motivation to protect the dielectric film.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneno in view of Chen, Shepard as applied to claims 1-3, 5-7, 10-11, 17 above, and further in view of US 20200234932 to Parimi.
Claim 15: The apparatus of Kaneno in view of Chen, Shepard does not disclose wherein the pattern is corresponding to a patterned mask used to form the patterned coating film on the susceptor.
Parimi discloses wherein the pattern (142/210, Fig. 3A-3D) is corresponding to a patterned mask (305 [mask pattern]) used to form the patterned coating film (142/210/300) on the susceptor (104 [pedestal]), for the purpose of improving the temperature uniformity of the entire substrate, which improves deposition uniformity on the substrate (para. [0036]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the pattern mask as taught by Parimi with motivation to improve the temperature uniformity of the entire substrate, which improves deposition uniformity on the substrate.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneno in view of Chen, Shepard as applied to claims 1-3, 5-7, 10-11, 17 above, and further in view of US 20140151332 to Fukasawa.
Claim 16: The apparatus of Kaneno in view of Chen, Shepard does not disclose wherein the patterned coating film is formed from various materials with different heat transfer coefficients.
Fukasawa discloses wherein the patterned component (“substrate supporting unit”, para. [0006]) is formed from various materials with different heat transfer coefficients (para. [0006]) for the purpose of causing different portions of the substrate to have substantially different temperatures during the process (para. [0006]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the material requirement taught by Fukasawa with motivation to cause different portions of the substrate to have substantially different temperatures during the process.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 5782979 to Kaneno in view of US 20220076988 to Chen, and further in view of US 20090293647 to Muneishi, US 20050193951 to Furuse, US 20220349057 to Lai, US 20200013660 to Halm.
Kaneno discloses a semiconductor wafer carrier structure, comprising: a carrier body (200 [susceptor], Fig. 15A-C) having a surface (surface of 200); a protective film (300 [substrate holder]) covering the surface (surface of 200); a susceptor (600b [wafer tray]) disposed on the carrier body (200) and having an upper surface (upper surface of 600b).
However Kaneno does not disclose wherein the upper surface is a planar surface and is divided into a peripheral surface and a partial surface; and a patterned coating film formed on the partial surface of the susceptor and configured to directly face the semiconductor wafer, wherein a material of the patterned coating film is different from a material of the susceptor, so that the semiconductor wafer is entirely separated from the pattern of the patterned coating film, the patterned coating film are continuously and entirely distributed on the upper surface of the susceptor toward the semiconductor wafer.
Chen discloses wherein the upper surface of the susceptor (516 [surface] of 502 [susceptor substrate], Fig. 5C) appears to be a planar surface (Fig. 5C) and is divided into a peripheral surface and a partial surface (Fig. 5C); and a patterned coating film (504 [coating layer]) formed on the partial surface of the susceptor (502) and configured to directly face a semiconductor wafer (W [wafer]), wherein a material of the patterned coating film (para. [0045]) is different from a material of the susceptor (para. [0040]), wherein the patterned coating film (504) is continuously and entirely distributed on the upper surface of the susceptor (para. [0045-0046]) toward the semiconductor wafer (W), and the upper surface of the susceptor (516 of 502) is separated from the semiconductor wafer (W) by the patterned coating film (504), for the purpose of alleviating warpage and bowing while meeting the requirements of the size, weight, and designs (para. [0004]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the limitations above as taught by Chen with motivation to alleviate warpage and bowing while meeting the requirements of the size, weight, and designs.
However the apparatus of Kaneno in view of Chen does not disclose the susceptor is provided with a plurality of supporting parts protruding from the peripheral surface and individually distributed around a perimeter of the susceptor, and the supporting parts are configured to support a semiconductor wafer, and a top of the supporting parts is higher than a top of the patterned coating film in a thickness direction of the susceptor,
Muneishi discloses wherein the susceptor (100 [sample holder], Fig. 1) is provided with a plurality of supporting parts (1 [convex parts]) protruding from the peripheral surface (Fig. 2A) and individually distributed around a perimeter of the susceptor (Fig. 2A, 1, outermost 1’s), and a top of the supporting parts (top of 1) is higher than a top of the patterned coating film (3 [joining layer]) in a thickness direction of the susceptor (100, Fig. 2A), for the purpose of improving flatness of the sample, which can contribute to accuracy enhancement of processing and observation of the sample (para. [0030]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the supporting parts as taught by Muneishi with motivation to improve flatness of the sample, which can contribute to accuracy enhancement of processing and observation of the sample.
However the apparatus of Kaneno in view of Chen, Muneishi, does not disclose a passivation layer formed on the peripheral surface of the susceptor; and exposing the partial surface of the susceptor; wherein the passivation layer and the patterned coating film are continuously and entirely distributed on the upper surface of the susceptor toward the semiconductor wafer, and the upper surface of the susceptor is separated from the semiconductor wafer by the passivation layer and the patterned coating film.
Furuse discloses a passivation layer (3 [cover], Fig. 2) formed on the peripheral surface of the susceptor (150) and exposing the upper surface of the susceptor; wherein the passivation layer (3) and the patterned coating film (2 [dielectric film are continuously and entirely distributed on the upper surface of the susceptor (1) toward the semiconductor wafer (W, Fig. 3) and the upper surface of the susceptor (upper surface of 1) is separated from the semiconductor wafer (W) by the passivation layer (3) and the patterned coating film (2), for the purpose of protecting the dielectric film and electrode block (para. [0034]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the limitations above as taught by Furuse with motivation to protect the dielectric film and electrode block.
However the apparatus of Kaneno in view of Chen, Muneishi, Furuse does not disclose the patterned coating film has two or more different thicknesses to form a pattern between the supporting parts. It is noted that this limitation does not appear to be supported in the original disclosure of the now abandoned parent application (17/377/079), thus the limitation has the effective filing date of 09/26/2024.
Lai teaches the patterned coating film (346 [second outer heat conduction part], Fig. 3A/3B) has two or more different thicknesses (Fig. 3B) to form a pattern (346) between the supporting parts (122 [supporting parts]), for the purpose of fine-tuning the thickness of the portion of the patterned heat conduction part to be changed locally to meet the requirements of the process (para. [0027]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the limitation as taught by Lai with motivation to fine-tuning the thickness of the portion of the patterned heat conduction part to be changed locally to meet the requirements of the process.
Halm discloses a passivation layer (15 [cover layer], Fig. 4) formed on the supporting parts (11 [burls], para. [0077]), for the purpose of providing an additional protection of the insulating layer (para. [0077]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the limitation as taught by Halm with motivation to provide an additional protection of the insulating layer.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20230064309 discloses a susceptor (200 [ceramic member], Fig. 3-4) on a carrier body (111 [main body]) having a patterned coating film (211 root-side layer]) with a passivation layer (212 [tip side layer]) on top of the patterned film coating (para. [0048-0050]). US 20230008922 discloses a substrate support surface (229c, Fig. 2C) with depressed area (275) between first protrusions (231) and second protrusions (231a, para. [0049, 0054]).
US 20220005723 discloses a chuck (100, Fig. 2) having a reference surface (112 [top surface]), first protrusions (115 [mesas]), depressed portions (120, 140 [channels]) between the first protrusions (115) and second protrusions (130, 150 [bands], para. [0024-0030]). US 20220349057 discloses a carrier structure (300, Fig. 3A/3B) having a central protrusion (342), an annular protrusion (346), and a depressed portion (128, para. [0038]) by same assignee.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Charlee J. C. Bennett whose telephone number is (571)270-7972. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10am-6pm.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at 5712725166. 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.
/Charlee J. C. Bennett/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718
