CTNF 18/958,006 CTNF 81714 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 08-25 AIA Applicant's election with traverse of Group II, claims 8-20 in the reply filed on 04/06/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that a search of Group II is likely to provide a proper search of Group I and would not present an undue burden . This is not found persuasive because a search directed to the structural features of the apparatus would not necessarily uncover the most relevant prior art directed to methods of forming nanocrystalline diamond layers. Examination of both groups would require separate fields of search and impose a serious search and examination burden . The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 8-13 and 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (KR20210117071) in view of Tsutsmuoto et al. (JP2004091836) . As to claims 8 and 15, Park et al. discloses a chemical vapor deposition system having a chamber (10) defining an internal processing volume; a susceptor (20 of Fig.) having a support surface for supporting the substrate; a showerhead (30 of Fig.) positioned opposite the susceptor, the showerhead including a first surface, second surface opposite the first surface, a side surface extending from the firs surface and the second surface, a plurality of discharge ports (see D1) extending between the surfaces, and a plurality of discharge spaces (B) the heater including a filament (41 of Fig.) and positioned in the discharge spaces (see 0007, 0024-25, 28, 29, 31, and 0047). Park et al. fails to teach the body comprises a ceramic body and the filament comprises carbide or boride as required by claims 8 and 15. Tsutsmuoto et al. teaches a shower head for a heat filament CVD apparatus for forming diamond films where the filament is formed of tantalum carbide (see abstract, 0019). 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 process of Park et al. to include the carbide filament of Tsutsmuoto et al. One would have been motivated to do so since Tsutsmuoto et al. teaches an alternative heating element and it has been established the mere substitution of one known element for another provides predictable results. As to claims 9 and 16, the filament is tantalum carbide as taught by Tsutsmuoto et al. As to claim 10, the power source passes a current through the filament to resistively heat material (see 0031 of Park et al.). As to claims 11 and 17, the radial cavity extends form the center portion of the ceramic body towards the side surface (see Fig. 1 of Park). As to claims 12 and 18, Park et al. teaches each discharge space is aligned with a corresponding discharge such that after deposition the gas exits (see 0031 and Fig. 1). As to claims 13 and 19, Tsutsmuoto et al. teaches the carbide comprises a cylindrical body having a central portion having a first and second end; the first end portion sheath (7) extending from the first end of the central portion and a second end portion where the central proton having a first diameter and the end portions having a different diameter . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (KR20210117071) in view of Tsutsmuoto et al. (JP2004091836) as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Wu et al. (US 5209812) . The teachings of Park and Tsutsmuoto et al. as applied to claim 8 above. Park et al. Tsutsmuoto et al fail to teach the claimed controller required by claim 14. Wu et al. teaches a heating a filament with a low voltage to a temperature above 1900C; forming diamond producing feed gas over the filament where the feed gases comprise non-methyl hydrocarbon gas and depositing a diamond film (See col. 3, lines 17-29, col. 4, lines 44-54, claim 1). It would have bene obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of Park and Tsutsmuoto et al. to include the flow control and method of Wu et al. One would have been motivated to do so in order opt successfully form the nanocrystalline diamond layer . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (KR20210117071) in view of Tsutsmuoto et al. (JP2004091836) as applied to claim 15, and in further view of WU et al. (US 20080202688) . The teachings of Park and Tsutsmuoto et al. as applied to claim 15 above. Park and Tsutsmuoto et al. fail to teach the ceramic body comprises graphite. Wu teaches a shower head having a bulk layer made of graphite and a CVD SiC coating (see claim 1). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use the showerhead material of Wu in the apparatus of Park and Tsutsmuoto et al. One would have been motivated to do so since both are directed to an apparatus having a showerhead to dispense gas where Wu teaches an alternative showerhead. It has been established that the mere substitution of one known element for another provides predictable results. 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 Application/Control Number: 18/958,006 Page 2 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 18/958,006 Page 3 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 18/958,006 Page 4 Art Unit: 1712
Prosecution Insights