DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 1-10, drawn to manufacturing method of a substrate treating apparatus, classified in CPC class C23C14/24.
II. Claims 11-16, drawn to a substrate treating apparatus, classified in CPC H10P 72/7624.
The inventions are distinct, each from the other because of the following reasons:
Inventions I and II are related as process of making and product made. The inventions are distinct if either or both of the following can be shown: (1) that the process as claimed can be used to make another and materially different product or (2) that the product as claimed can be made by another and materially different process (MPEP § 806.05(f)). In the instant case the apparatus can be made by vapor deposition of the first coating layer.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all these inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because at least the following reason(s) apply:
(a) the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification.
(c) the inventions require a different field of search (for example, searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search queries).
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of a invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention.
The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To reserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
A phone restriction was made on 08/14/2024. Attorney John Castellano provisionally elected invention Group II, Apparatus claims 11-16, on 08/21/2026. Claims 1-10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Invention Group I, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Interpretations
The following limitations are considered product by process claims:
“wherein the first coating layer provided by thermal spray coating (TSC) of a ceramic material” of claim 13 (and similar for claim 16),
“wherein each of the second coating layer and the third coating layer is provided by atomic layer deposition (ALD)” of claim 14 (and similar for claim 16).
Furthermore, “forming a second coating layer on the first coating layer, the second coating layer having a smaller thickness than the bonding unit and higher hardness than the first coating layer” of claims 1 and 11, and
“wherein the second coating layer (260) and the third coating layer (270) have the same hardness and density“ of claim 12,
“a second coating layer provided on the first coating layer and provided by atomic layer deposition (ALD) of at least one of aluminum oxide (Al2O3) and yttrium oxide (Y2O3) so as to have a smaller thickness than the bonding unit and higher hardness and density than the first coating layer; and
a third coating layer provided from a step of the first coating layer formed along the step of the body to an upper end of the puck, having the same hardness and density as the second coating layer, and provided by atomic layer deposition (ALD)”, as the hardness and density of the film depends on the processing parameters of the ALD or the TSC (see some references cited in the conclusion), these properties are also depended on processing conditions.
The “a second coating layer” and “a third coating layer” of claims 11 and 16, claim 14 recites (as well as Applicants’ Specification) that the second coating layer and the third coating layer are made of the same material. Therefore, a layer of such material can be considered as the combination of these two layers.
The “a gas supply unit supplying a process gas for plasma-etching the substrate to the treating space” is considered an intended use of the apparatus.
It has been held that claim language that simply specifies an intended use or field of use for the invention generally will not limit the scope of a claim (Walter, 618 F.2d at 769, 205 USPQ at 409; MPEP 2106). Additionally, in apparatus claims, intended use must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim (In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); MPEP2111.02). When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent (In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977); MPEP 2112.01).
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KOBAYASHI (US 20190019654, hereafter ‘654).
‘654 teaches some limitations of:
Claim 11: a plasma processing apparatus 1 … a capacitively coupled plasma type parallel-flat plate plasma processing apparatus, and includes a substantially cylindrical processing vessel (chamber) 2 … for performing plasma treatment such as etching or depositing ([0021], includes the claimed “A substrate treating apparatus comprising: a chamber having a treating space in which a process of plasma-etching a substrate is performed”);
A mounting base 3 is used for placing a semiconductor wafer (hereinafter, it will be referred to as a “wafer”) which is an example of a substrate ([0022], includes the claimed “a support unit supporting the substrate in the treating space”);
a gas shower head 20 ([0027], last sentence, includes the claimed “and a gas supply unit supplying a process gas for plasma-etching the substrate to the treating space”),
The mounting base 3 includes a base member 12 … The base member 12 is formed of, for example, aluminum (Al) ([0022]), With reference to FIG. 2A and FIG. 2B, a specific structure of the electrostatic chuck 10 will be described … The base member 12 has a step on its circumference ([0038], includes the claimed “wherein the support unit includes: a body having a lower end provided at a first level, having a step formed at a second level higher than the first level, having an upper end provided at a third level higher than the second level, and made of aluminum”);
The base member 12 is formed of aluminum, and an outer side wall (including the step) of the base member 12 is coated with thermal sprayed ceramic 121 consisting of alumina (Al2O3). Note that yttria (Y2O3) may be used instead of alumina (Al2O3) ([0037], last sentence), Although the feedstock (that is, the thermal sprayed film 123 and 124) may be inorganic metal material including metal oxide or metal nitride, the feedstock is preferably metal oxide such as alumina (Al2O3) or yttria (Y2O3) ([0043], last sentence, thermal sprayed ceramic 121 plus 123 and 124, as the same material, is the same composition as Applicants’ first coating layer, second coating layer and third coating layer, includes the claimed “a first coating layer formed from the first level to a height of a fourth level higher than the third level so as to surround the body” as the thermal sprayed film 123 and 124 is at fourth level higher than the third level”);
the electrostatic chuck 10 is adhered to the base member 12 via an adhesive layer 122 ([0025], includes the claimed “a bonding unit formed from an upper surface of the body to the fourth level”, an upper portion of the thermal sprayed film 123 and 124 is considered the claimed “a second coating layer provided on the first coating layer and having a smaller thickness than the bonding unit”; and the ESC 10 is the claimed “a puck provided on upper surfaces of the bonding unit and the second coating layer”);
The electrostatic chuck 10 is a sintered material of alumina ceramic (Al2O3), and is disposed on the base member 12 ([0038], 3rd sentence, again, as the same material of Applicants’ first coating layer, second coating layer and third coating layer, therefore, an outer edge ring portion of the alumina 10b reads into the claimed “and a third coating layer provided from a step of the first coating layer formed along the step of the body to an upper end of the puck”).
‘654 does not expressly teaches the other limitations of:
Claim 11: (a second coating layer provided on the first coating layer and having a smaller thickness than the bonding unit) and higher hardness than the first coating layer.
It is well-known that alumina is harder than yttria. As there are two different choices for the thermal sprayed ceramic 121 and 123/124, it would have been a limited choice of selecting yttria and the thermal sprayed ceramic 121 and alumina as the thermal sprayed ceramic 123/124, therefore, obvious to have had the second coating layer at a higher hardness than the first coating layer (according to KSR).
Note that even for the same material as the two layers, the deposition parameters may also make one layer harder or softer than the other.
‘654 also teaches the limitations of:
Claim 12: as the dielectric layer 10b is also alumina, the periphery ring of the dielectric layer 10b is the same material as the alumina of the thermal sprayed ceramic 123/124 (includes the claimed “wherein the second coating layer and the third coating layer have the same hardness and density”).
Claim 13: The base member 12 is formed of aluminum, and an outer side wall (including the step) of the base member 12 is coated with thermal sprayed ceramic 121 consisting of alumina ([0043], includes the claimed “wherein the first coating layer provided by thermal spray coating (TSC) of a ceramic material”, note this is a product by process claim).
Claim 14: the coating method is a product by process claim, reads into the claimed “wherein each of the second coating layer and the third coating layer is provided by atomic layer deposition (ALD) of at least one of aluminum oxide (Al2O3) and yttrium oxide (Y2O3)”.
Claim 15: An example of the adhesive layer 122 is a resin layer formed of silicone ([0039], 2nd sentence, includes the claimed “wherein the bonding unit is made of silicon”), The electrostatic chuck 10 is a sintered material of alumina ceramic (Al2O3), and is disposed on the base member 12 ([0038], 3rd sentence, includes the claimed “and the puck is made of a ceramic material, and has the same radius as the first coating layer” as shown in Figs. 2A-2B).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KOBAYASHI (US 20190019654, hereafter ‘654), in view of White et al. (US 20080035306, hereafter ‘306).
‘654 teaches some limitations of:
Claim 16: a plasma processing apparatus 1 … a capacitively coupled plasma type parallel-flat plate plasma processing apparatus, and includes a substantially cylindrical processing vessel (chamber) 2 … for performing plasma treatment such as etching or depositing ([0021], includes the claimed “A substrate treating apparatus comprising: a chamber having a treating space in which a process of plasma-etching a substrate is performed”);
A mounting base 3 is used for placing a semiconductor wafer (hereinafter, it will be referred to as a “wafer”) which is an example of a substrate ([0022], includes the claimed “a support unit supporting the substrate in the treating space”);
a gas shower head 20 ([0027], last sentence, includes the claimed “and a gas supply unit supplying a process gas for plasma-etching the substrate to the treating space”),
The mounting base 3 includes a base member 12 … The base member 12 is formed of, for example, aluminum (Al) ([0022]), With reference to FIG. 2A and FIG. 2B, a specific structure of the electrostatic chuck 10 will be described … The base member 12 has a step on its circumference ([0038], includes the claimed “wherein the support unit includes: a body having a lower end provided at a first level, having a step formed at a second level higher than the first level, having an upper end provided at a third level higher than the second level, and made of aluminum”);
inside the base member 12, a coolant passage 12a is formed ([0025], 2nd sentence, includes the claimed “and including a first circulation flow passage through which a heat transfer medium circulates”);
The base member 12 is formed of aluminum, and an outer side wall (including the step) of the base member 12 is coated with thermal sprayed ceramic 121 consisting of alumina (Al2O3). Note that yttria (Y2O3) may be used instead of alumina (Al2O3) ([0037], last sentence), Although the feedstock (that is, the thermal sprayed film 123 and 124) may be inorganic metal material including metal oxide or metal nitride, the feedstock is preferably metal oxide such as alumina (Al2O3) or yttria (Y2O3) ([0043], last sentence, thermal sprayed ceramic 121 plus 123 and 124, as the same material, is the same composition as Applicants’ first coating layer, second coating layer and third coating layer, includes the claimed “a first coating layer formed from the first level to a height of a fourth level higher than the third level so as to surround the body and provided by a thermal spray coating (TSC) method of a ceramic material” as the thermal sprayed film 123 and 124 is at fourth level higher than the third level”, note thermal spray coating method is a product by process claim);
the electrostatic chuck 10 is adhered to the base member 12 via an adhesive layer 122 ([0025]) An example of the adhesive layer 122 is a resin layer formed of silicone ([0039], 2nd sentence, includes the claimed “a bonding unit formed from an upper surface of the body to the fourth level and made of silicon”, an upper portion of the thermal sprayed film 123 and 124 is considered the claimed “a second coating layer provided on the first coating layer and provided by atomic layer deposition (ALD) of at least one of aluminum oxide (Al2O3) and yttrium oxide (Y2O3) so as to have a smaller thickness than the bonding unit”, note ALD method is a product by process claim, and the ESC 10 is the claimed “a puck provided on upper surfaces of the bonding unit and the second coating layer, and having the same radius as the first coating layer” as shown in Figs. 2A-2B);
The electrostatic chuck 10 is a sintered material of alumina ceramic (Al2O3), and is disposed on the base member 12 ([0038], 3rd sentence, again, as the same material of Applicants’ first coating layer, second coating layer and third coating layer, therefore, an outer edge ring portion of the alumina 10b reads into the claimed “and a third coating layer provided from a step of the first coating layer formed along the step of the body to an upper end of the puck” and “and provided by atomic layer deposition (ALD)” is a product by process claim).
‘894 does not teach the other limitations of:
Claim 16: (16A) (a body … including a first circulation flow passage through which a heat transfer medium circulates), and a second circulation flow passage through which a cooling fluid circulates;
(16B) (a second coating layer provided on the first coating layer and provided by atomic layer deposition (ALD) of at least one of aluminum oxide (Al2O3) and yttrium oxide (Y2O3) so as to have a smaller thickness than the bonding unit) and higher hardness and density than the first coating layer;
(a third coating layer provided from a step of the first coating layer formed along the step of the body to an upper end of the puck), having the same hardness and density as the second coating layer, (and provided by atomic layer deposition (ALD)”).
‘306 is an analogous art in the field of HEATING AND COOLING OF SUBSTRATE SUPPORT (title), including plasma ([0006]), The substrate support assembly 238 includes a conductive body 224 … the conductive body 224 is made of an aluminum material ([0044]). ‘306 teaches that as shown in FIGS. 3A-3F, each of the cooling channels may include cooling passages 310A, 310B, 310C adapted to cover cooling of the whole area of the substrate support surface 234 ([0057]), for the purpose of temperature uniformity ([0007]).
Before the effective filing dates of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have divided the coolant passage 12a of ‘654 into multiple coolant passages (the limitation of 16A), as taught by ‘306, for the purpose of temperature uniformity, as taught by ‘306 ([0007]).
As for the limitations of 16B, It is well-known that alumina is harder than yttria. As there are two different choices for the thermal sprayed ceramic 121 and 123/124, it would have been a limited choice of selecting yttria and the thermal sprayed ceramic 121 and alumina as the thermal sprayed ceramic 123/124, therefore, obvious to have had the second coating layer at a higher hardness than the first coating layer.
Furthermore, as the density of the deposited film depends on the operational parameter, as which layer having higher density is again a limited choice.
Note that even for the same material as the two layers, the deposition parameters may also make one layer harder or softer and denser or lighter than the other.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20160268483 is cited for film density of Al2O3 ALD films depends on deposition temperature ([0015], 2nd sentence). US 20190062905 is cited for ALD film having low hardness ([0030]). US 20130209006 is cited for ALD film of alumina having higher hardness (abstract). US 20050214580 is cited for spayed coating has low density ([0009]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEATH T CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1870. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-5:00 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, Parviz Hassanzadeh can be reached at 571-272-1435. 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.
/KEATH T CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights