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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-7 in the reply filed on 03/30/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that claim 1 is not directed to an apparatus capable of us This is not found persuasive because claim 1 is directed to an apparatus comprising a chamber, a fluid supply module, a first exhaust module, and a second exhaust module. Although claim 1 recites a functional limitation concerning operation of the first exhaust module during a high-pressure condition, the claim remains directed to a physical apparatus. The apparatus may be employed in a different deposition, treatment, cleaning, annealing or other substrate processing methods that utilize elevated chamber pressure.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
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) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2003/0066483) in view of Shiba (US 2021/0230746).
As to claim 1, Lee et al. discloses an apparatus comprising a chamber having an inner space; a fluid supply module, a first outlet, a second outlet, and exhaust paths (see Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
690
878
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Lee et al. fails to teach the first exhaust module has a smaller pressure adjustment amount than the second exhaust module and the first module operates only when pressure is above atmospheric pressure as required by claim 1.
Shiba discloses a pressure control system used to stabilize the reaction chamber pressure (see abstract). The system comprises an exhaust line that is coupled downstream of the chamber connected to a vent line having a conductance control valve to vent the line and adjust in response to feedback from the pressure monitor on the vent line (see abstract). Shiba teaches the vent line pressure can be detected by monitoring the difference in pressure between the vent line and chamber pressure and controlling the control valve for the vent line (see 0010-0017, 0062).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Lee to include the pressure control teachings of Shiba because Shiba teaches different exhaust paths maybe utilized according to chamber pressure conditions to balance pressure stability and evacuation efficiency. A person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that , in a substrate processing chamber operating over multiple pressure regimes, a lower conductance exhaust path provides finer pressure regulation while a higher conductance exhaust path provides greater pressure adjustment capability and more efficient pressure reduction. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to configure the exhaust paths of Lee such that a first exhaust path having a smaller pressure-adjustment effect to utilize during elevated pressure processing conditions, while a second exhaust having a larger pressure adjustment effect is utilized during pressure transitions and/or lower pressure operation.
As to claim 2, Shiba teaches pressure dependent operation of exhaust components and selective activation of exhaust paths during pump-down and pressure transition operations.
As to claim 3, Lee teaches the outlets have different diameters where the first outlet has a smaller diameter (see 0035).
As to claim 4, Lee teaches the diameter is comparatively larger in order to control the amount of exhaust gas is removes (see 0037). It would have been obvious to one having
As to claim 6, Shiba teaches the valves are needle or throttle valves (see 0067).
As to claim 7, the system comprises a vacuum pump (see 0033 of Shiba).
ordinary skill in the art to use the claimed range of diameter sizes through routine experimentation in order to optimize the amount of exhaust gas removed from the system.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Cachet I Proctor whose telephone number is (571)272-0691. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7-3 pm.
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, Michael Cleveland can be reached at 571-272-1418. 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.
/CACHET I. PROCTOR/
Examiner
Art Unit 1712
/CACHET I PROCTOR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712
Prosecution Insights