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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 8, 12 and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 7, “at least one piezoelectric pressure sensors” should read --at least one piezoelectric pressure sensor--.
Claim 8, “at least on” should read –at least one--.
Claim 12, “at least one piezoelectric pressure sensor” should read --the at least one piezoelectric pressure sensor--.
Claim 16, “antennae” should read –antennas--.Appropriate correction is required.
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, 6, 9-13 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunter (US Patent No. 6,244,121 B1) in view of Takizawa (US Publication No. 2009/0146230 A1) and Weijand (US Patent No. 5,336,244).
Regarding claims 1, 6, 10-13 and 16, Hunter teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. below) a method of leveling a pedestal, the method comprising: within a semiconductor processing chamber (chamber 114), raising a substrate support (par. 24: “substrate support structure 274 generally includes a chuck 294 for supporting a substrate”) to a position proximate a faceplate (par. 22: “A process gas shower head 276 disposed in the chamber lid 278 permits a process gas to enter through a gas source 282 and be dispersed into a processing region 286 of the interior of the process chamber 114 through shower head nozzles 284”), wherein a leveling apparatus (sensor device 200 shown in Figs. 5, 7A-7B; see par. 15, 18-29) is seated on the substrate support. However Hunter fails to teach the sensor being a piezoelectric pressure sensor coupled between two plates of the leveling apparatus (Hunter uses a different type of sensing mechanism) and does not teach the claimed receiver and does not teach the specifics of the piezoelectric sensor having antenna, transmitter and transduce.
PNG
media_image1.png
843
511
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Takizawa teaches a piezoelectric pressure sensor with a piezoelectric film 4 sandwiched between two plates. Takizawa teaches this pressure sensor enables pressure to be detected with highly sensitivity (par. 0010).
PNG
media_image2.png
448
545
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to use pressure sensor of Takizawa in device of Hunter for sensing wafer’s pressure on the substrate support with high sensitivity.
Weijand teaches a wireless piezoelectric sensor equipped with antenna 52, a transducer (not shown in FIG. 1 due to the small scale of that figure) and a transmitter/receiver (RF TX/RX) unit 54 (see par. 10).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to use controller, antenna, transmitter and transducer to wirelessly connect the piezoelectric sensor of Hunter with a controller.
Regarding claim 9, Hunter teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) the semiconductor processing chamber further comprises a chamber body (chamber 114) comprising sidewalls (walls 270) and a base, the chamber body defining an interior volume (see Figs. 7A-7B), wherein: the substrate support extends through the base of the chamber body, and the substrate support is configured to support a substrate within the interior volume (par. 22: “A process gas shower head 276 disposed in the chamber lid 278 permits a process gas to enter through a gas source 282 and be dispersed into a processing region 286 of the interior of the process chamber 114 through shower head nozzles 284”); the faceplate is positioned within the interior volume of the chamber body, and the faceplate defines a plurality of apertures (284) through the faceplate; and the leveling apparatus seated on the substrate support.
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunter in view of Takizawa and Weijand and further in view of Charles et al. (Proceedings of 2003 ASME, IMECHE: International Mechanical Engineering Congress Washington, D.C., USA, November 15-21, 2003) hereinafter Charles.
Regarding claims 7-8, Hunter alone or in combination with Takizawa and Weijand does not teach the leveling apparatus comprises at least two piezoelectric pressure sensors compressibly coupled between two plates of the leveling apparatus and does not teach the piezoelectric pressure sensors comprise surface acoustic wave pressure sensors.
Charles teaches wireless piezoelectric pressure sensors used in molds. As shown in Figs. below, plurality of piezoelectric pressure sensors compressibly coupled between plates to measure pressure inside the cavity.
PNG
media_image3.png
485
709
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
475
633
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
494
286
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to piezoelectric pressure sensor of Charles in device of Hunter to measure pressure between the substrate support and the faceplate.
Regarding claim 17, Hunter teaches heating the substrate support to a temperature above or about 100 °C (Col. 9,lines 31-59: “above 300 degrees”).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunter in view of Takizawa and Weijand and further in view of Kim et al. (US 20260162947 A1) hereinafter Kim.
Regarding claim 14, Takizawa does not teach the at least one piezoelectric pressure sensor comprises one or more of lithium niobate, quartz, lithium tantalate, or lanthanum gallium silicate.
Kim teaches high-sensitivity piezoelectric element by using a high-performance piezoelectric material such as quartz or lithium niobate (par. 0092).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to use quartz or lithium niobate in piezoelectric pressure sensor to increase sensitivity.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunter in view of Takizawa and Weijand and further in view of Patil et al. (US 20220122879 A1) hereinafter Patil.
Regarding claim 15, Takizawa is silent regarding ceramic material.
Patil teaches ceramic materials used for substrate supports to withstand high temperatures (par. 0042).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to use ceramic materials in device of Hunter to withstand high temperature inside the chamber.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4, 5 and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Also adding limitation “the leveling apparatus is configured to identify parallelism between the substrate support and the faceplate when the leveling apparatus is contacted or compressed against the faceplate by the substrate support” to claim 1 moves the case in condition for allowance.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHDI H NEJAD whose telephone number is (571)270-0464. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-4pm 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, David Posigian can be reached at (313) 446-6546. 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.
MAHDI H. NEJAD
Examiner
Art Unit 3723
/MAHDI H NEJAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights