DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 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.
Information Disclosure Statements
2. The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 12/05/24 and 11/20/25 have been considered by the examiner.
Priority
3. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
4. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: on line 18 of page 1 of the instant specification, the word "place" should be changed to --support--. On line 12 of page 2, the word "type" should be changed to --embodiment--, and on line 20 of this page, "which is a control signal" is not clear because it cannot be determined what this is referring to, i.e., whether it is referring to the ON signal or to the high-frequency signal. Applicant should make an appropriate amendment at this portion of the specification in order to clear up this ambiguity. Also on line 20 of page 1, the word "outputted" should be changed to --output-- for purposes of proper grammatical form, and the word "inputted" on line 21 should be changed to --input--, again for purposes of proper grammatical form. On line 25 of page 3, "one in which" should be deleted. On the first line of page 6, the word "are" should be changed to --is--. On line 11 of page 8, the word "to" should be changed to --with--. On line 22 of page 8, the comma after the word "used" should be deleted. On the first line of page 9, "[V]" should be changed to
--V--, and on line 2 of this page, "the drain" should be changed to --its drain--, and the word "the" at the end of this line should be changed to --its--. On line 21 of page 9, "inputted" should be changed to --output-- (note that the current is output from detector 42, not input from detector 42), and on line 23 of page 9, the word "inputted" should again be changed to --output-- (and note that the same change should also be made on lines 3, 5, 8, 11, 13, 15, 17, 20, 22 and 24 of page 10). On the second line of page 11, the word "outputted" should again be changed to --output--, and note that the same change should also be made on line 5 of this page. On line 3 of page 12, "[V]" should again be changed to --V--, and note that the same change should also be made on page 13, lines 1, 11 and 12. Also on page 13, line 7, the word "degree" should be changed to --degrees--. On line 4 of page 14, "OPF" should be changed to --OFF--. On line 16 of page 14, "[V]" should again be changed to --V--, and on line 21 of this page, the brackets around the word "degrees" should be deleted as well. On line 5 of page 15, the word "degree" should again be changed to --degrees--. On line 16 of page 16, "For" should be changed to --As a--. On line 9 of page 18, "on the substrate W" should be deleted, and note that the same deletion should also be made on line 13 of this page. On lines 13 and 14 of page 20, the brackets around microseconds and seconds, respectively, should be deleted. On the first line of page 21, the word "perform" should be deleted. On line 14 of page 21, the word "inputted" should again be changed to
--input--, and the word "outputted" on line 16 should again be changed to --output--. On line 10 of page 23, "is a signal that" should be deleted. On line 17 of page 23, the word "outputted" should again be changed to --output--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
5. The drawings are objected to because blank boxes 22, 24, 26, 28 and 40 shown in instant figure 1, and also blank box 43 shown in instant figure 2 need to be provided with text labels, i.e., blank box 22 should be labeled "gas supply part", blank box 24 should be labeled "exhaust device", blank box 26 should be labeled "high-frequency power supply", blank box 28 should be labeled "matching device", blank box 40 should be labeled "phase control circuit", and box 43 should be labeled "ON signal generator".
Applicant should note MPEP 608.02(b), subsection II, which indicates that drawing figures should be objected to by the examiner for the situation where unlabeled rectangular boxes shown in the drawings have not been provided with descriptive text labels (note form paragraph 6.22 where the first "Examiner Note" reads as follows: "In bracket 1, insert the reason for the objection, for example, --the unlabeled rectangular box(es) shown in the drawings should be provided with descriptive text labels--". Moreover, applicant should note 37 CFR 1.83(a) which also indicates that each of the rectangular boxes shown in the drawing figures should be illustrated in the form of a labeled rectangular box. Applicant should also note that if the blank boxes are too small to fit the text labels inside these boxes, the text labels can be provided outside of the boxes with a line pointing to the box (as shown, for example, in figure 2 of USPAP 2002/0159276, i.e., blank box 18 with a text label “Oscillator” outside the box 18 with a line pointing thereto).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
6. Claims 1, 7, 12 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
On line 10 of claim 1, the word "outputted" should be changed to --output--, and on line 11 of claim 1, the word "inputted" should be changed to --input--.
On line 2 of claim 7, "a high-frequency signal of" should be deleted.
On line 4 of claim 12, the word "outputted" should again be changed to --output--.
On the penultimate line of claim 12, --a-- should be inserted before "processing".
On line 2 of claim 15, "a high-frequency signal of" should be deleted.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
7. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
On line 10 of claim 1, "which is a control signal" is indefinite because it cannot be determined what this is referring to in claim 1, i.e., whether it is referring to the ON signal for the high-frequency signal. It is suggested that this phrase simply be deleted from claim 1 in order to overcome this indefiniteness rejection.
Claims 2-11 are rejected as being indefinite in view of their dependencies, directly or indirectly, on indefinite claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-8 and 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otomo (USPAP 2023/0178338) in view of Goodman (USP 6,887,339).
As to claims 1 and 11, Otomo discloses, in figures 1 and 2,
a plasma processing apparatus comprising:
a processing chamber (processing chamber 10) configured to form a processing space (the processing space directly above substrate W);
an application electrode (application electrode 20) disposed on one side of the processing space and connected to a high-frequency power supply (high-frequency power supply 26);
a counter electrode (counter electrode 18) disposed on the other side of the processing space; and
a phase control circuit (phase control circuit 1A) connected to the counter electrode.
Not disclosed by Otomo are the limitations recited on the last four lines of claim 1, i.e., the phase control circuit including a semiconductor switch, and an ON signal shorter than one cycle of the high-frequency signal output from power supply 26 being input to the semiconductor switch in synchronization with the frequency of the high-frequency signal. These limitations would have been obvious, however, to one of ordinary skill in the art, the reason being that it was old and well-known in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's invention to apply an ON signal to the input of a semiconductor switch for the purpose of controlling the impedance of a phase control circuit, one example of this well-known concept being disclosed in figure 13B of Goodman et al, i.e., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the phase control circuit 1A shown in figures 1 and 2 of Otomo could be replaced with the phase control circuit 430 shown in figure 13B of Goodman et al, as a simple substitution of one known phase control circuit in a plasma processing apparatus with another phase control circuit in a plasma processing apparatus--note that when such a substitution is made, the ON signal applied to FET 441 will either inherently or obviously be shorter than one cycle of Otomo's high-frequency signal output by power source 26 and this ON signal will be inherently or obviously in synchronization with the frequency of the high-frequency signal output from high-frequency power supply 26.
As to claim 2, note that the claimed phase control circuit can alternatively be read on the combination of circuits 1A, CNT, VM and V1 in Otomo's figure 1, and when using such an interpretation the claimed detector can read on Otomo's detector V1--note that this detector is disposed between the high-frequency power supply 26 and the obvious semiconductor switch included as part of phase control circuit 1A (obvious, as noted above in the rejection of claim 1), and note further that the claimed ON signal will be generated based on the current detected by the detector V1 (note that detector V1 inherently or obviously detects both voltage and current of the high-frequency signal output from Otomo's high-frequency power supply 26).
As to claim 3, note that when Otomo's phase control circuit 1A is replaced with the Goodman et al phase control circuit 430 (obvious, as noted above in the rejection of claim 1), it will include a capacitive element, i.e., the capacitive element is any one of capacitors 432, 434, 435, 442 and 443.
As to claim 4, note that when Otomo's phase control circuit 1A is replaced with the Goodman et al phase control circuit 430 (obvious, as noted above in the rejection of claim 1), it will include an inductive element, i.e., the inductive element is either inductive element 431 or inductive element 433, and note further that such an inductive element will either inherently or obviously be at a position closer to the high-frequency power supply 26 than to detector V1, or at a position closer to ground than to the semiconductor switch 441.
As to claim 5, although Otomo as modified by Goodman does not indicate that the ON signal is generated based on switching of the type of gas used in the plasma processing apparatus, this limitation also would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art who would have easily recognized that different types of gas used for performing different plasma processing will need different amounts of phase control, i.e., different impedance matching adjustment, and such could obviously be provided by using different PWM duty cycles of the ON signal applied to the gate terminal of transistor 441. The same is true for the limitation of claim 6, i.e., one of ordinary skill in the art also would have easily recognized that different flow rates of the processing gas will similarly require different amounts of phase control, i.e., different impedance matching adjustment, and such could obviously be provided by using different different PWM duty cycles of the ON signal applied to the gate terminal of transistor 441.
As to claim 7, note that the output of Otomo's high-frequency power supply 26 is a pulse waveform having a specific pulse width, and note further that the ON signal applied to the gate terminal of transistor 441 will inherently or obviously be generated based on the pulse waveform output from power supply 26.
As to claim 8, note that the ON signal applied to the gate terminal of transistor 441, when added to figure 1 of Otomo, will inherently or obviously be generated based on a bias signal supplied to the application electrode 20, i.e., the output of high-frequency power supply 26 in figure 1 of Otomo can be interpreted as a bias signal using the test of broadest reasonable interpretation.
As to claims 12-16, the limitations of these method claims are rejected using the same analysis as set forth above in the rejection of apparatus claims 1-4, 7, 8 and 11.
Allowable Subject Matter
9. Claims 9 and 10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: none of the prior art of record discloses or suggests the plasma processing apparatus of claim 2 with the further limitation that the ON signal is generated by taking a zero cross point, where the waveform of the current of the high-frequency signal changes from a negative side to a positive side, as a reference point for a duration of the ON signal, as recited in claim 9. Claim 10 is allowable in view of its dependency on allowable claim 9.
Prior Art Not Relied Upon
10. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Figure 1 of Yamawaku et al and figure 1 of Tomita et al show two further examples of the use of a variable phase control circuit coupled between a counter electrode and ground, note that each of these variable phase control circuits could obviously be replaced with the variable phase control circuit of Goodman et al, supra.
Conclusion
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH B WELLS whose telephone number is (571)272-1757. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5pm.
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, LINCOLN DONOVAN can be reached at (571)272-1988. 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.
/KENNETH B WELLS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2842 February 17, 2026