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 .
Remarks
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on 11/05/24. Examiner acknowledged that claims 1-20 are pending.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/05/24, 08/08/25 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 12, 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 2020/0013595).
Regarding Claim 1, Lee teaches a substrate treating apparatus comprising: a chamber housing (Fig. 1: 110) providing a space in which a substrate (Fig. 1: W) is treated; an electro-static chuck (Fig. 1: 150) supporting the substrate; a showerhead unit (Fig. 1; 130) providing a first gas (Fig. 1: 120) to the space; a plasma generating unit generating plasma (Fig. 1: 12) for treating the substrate by using the first gas; a second gas (Fig. 1: 170) from a surface of the electro-static chuck to an inner space of the chamber housing, wherein the electro-static chuck includes: a first plate (Fig. 2: 154); a second plate (Fig. 2: 153) disposed on the first plate; and an adhesive layer (Fig. 2: 156) bonding the first plate and the second plate to each other.
Lee does not explicitly teach in Fig. 2 a gas spraying apparatus; the gas spraying apparatus sprays the second gas through an outlet formed between the first plate and the adhesive layer. However, Fig. 3 teaches gas is pushed through opening 194. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Lee in order to push gas upward through the first plate since an apparatus is necessary in order to push the gas through since gas doesn’t flow against gravity.
Regarding Claims 2 and 16, Lee teaches the substrate treating apparatus of claim 1, wherein the gas spraying apparatus further sprays the second gas through an outlet (Fig. 3: 194) formed on a surface of the first plate.
Regarding Claims 3 and 17, Lee teaches the substrate treating apparatus of claim 1, wherein the second gas is an inert gas ([0032] “refrigerant gas 172”; NOTE: it’s obvious that the refrigerant is inert to keep it’s coolant property).
Regarding Claims 4 and 18, Lee teaches the substrate treating apparatus of claim 1, wherein the second gas is a gas ([0024] “He gas” is inert) that does not react with the first gas.
Regarding Claim 5, Lee teaches the substrate treating apparatus of claim 1, wherein the gas spraying apparatus includes: a gas supply unit (Fig. 1: 170) providing the second gas; and a gas supply line (Fig. 1: 174) connected to the gas supply unit, moving the second gas and including the first outlet.
Regarding Claim 6, Lee teaches the substrate treating apparatus of claim 5 except wherein the gas supply line further includes a second outlet formed on a surface of the first plate. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling of the claimed invention to include a second outlet on the surface of the plate in order to allow the gas to exit onto the plate faster and cool down the wafer faster since a higher amount of gas is available to cool the wafer more uniformly.
Regarding Claim 7, Lee teaches the substrate treating apparatus of claim 6, wherein the gas supply line includes: a first gas supply pipe (Fig. 2: 174) connected to the first outlet (Fig. : 194) inside the first plate;
Let does not explicitly teach in Fig. 2 a second gas supply pipe connected to the second outlet inside the first plate. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling of the claimed invention to include a second gas pipe in order to provide gas to a second outlet since a supply pipe is necessary to direct gas to different location.
Regarding Claims 12 and 19, Lee teaches the substrate treating apparatus of claim 1, wherein the gas spraying apparatus sprays the second gas while the substrate is being treated (Fig. 3: He gas is provided onto the plate as the wafer W is being treated with plasma).
Regarding Claim 15, Lee teaches a gas spraying apparatus provided in a substrate (Fig. 3: W) treating apparatus together with an electro-static chuck including a first plate (Fig. 2: 154), a second plate (Fig. 2: 153) disposed on the first plate, and an adhesive layer (Fig. 2: 156) bonding the first plate and the second plate to each other, the gas spraying apparatus comprising: a gas supply unit (Fig. 1; 170) providing a second gas (Fig. 1: 170 provides He gas) different from a first gas (Fig. 1: 120) used to treat the substrate; and a gas supply line (Fig. 1: 174) connected to the gas supply unit, moving the second gas; the second gas to an inner space of the substrate treating apparatus through an outlet (Fig. 3: 194) formed between the first plate and the adhesive layer.
Lee does not explicitly teach in Fig. 2 the gas spraying apparatus sprays. However, Fig. 3 teaches gas is pushed through opening 194. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Lee in order to push gas upward through the first plate since an apparatus is necessary in order to push the gas through since gas doesn’t flow against gravity.
Regarding Claim 20, Lee teaches a substrate treating apparatus comprising: a chamber housing (Fig. 1: 110) providing a space in which a substrate (Fig. 1: W) is treated; an electro-static chuck (Fig. 1: 150) supporting the substrate; a showerhead unit (Fig. 1; 130) providing a first gas (Fig. 1: 120) to the space; a plasma generating unit generating plasma (Fig. 1: 12) for treating the substrate by using the first gas; spraying a second gas (Fig. 1: 170) from a surface of the electro-static chuck to an inner space of the chamber housing, wherein the electro-static chuck includes: a first plate (Fig. 2: 154); a second plate (Fig. 2: 153) disposed on the first plate; and an adhesive layer (Fig. 2: 156) bonding the first plate and the second plate to each other; a gas supply unit (Fig. 1: 170) providing the second gas; and a gas supply line (Fig. 1: 174) connected to the gas supply unit, moving the second gas and including a first outlet (Fig. 3: 194) formed between the first plate and the adhesive layer; and the second gas is an inert gas ([0024] “He gas” is inert).
Lee does not explicitly teach in Fig. 2 a gas spraying apparatus; a second outlet formed on a surface of the first plate, the gas spraying apparatus sprays the second gas through the first outlet and the second outlet. However, Fig. 3 teaches gas is pushed through opening 194. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Lee in order to include a second outlet and push gas upward through the first plate since an apparatus is necessary in order to push the gas through since gas doesn’t flow against gravity as well as the second outlet allowing more gas to flow out for cooling the wafer faster.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-11, 13-14 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENRY T LUONG whose telephone number is (571)270-7008. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday: 8:00-6:00.
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, Alexander Taningco can be reached at (571) 272-8048. 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.
/Henry Luong/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights