DETAILED ACTION
Final
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 .
Response to Amendment/Arguments
Claims 1, 9 and 15 are currently amended. The remarks have clarified/persuasively argued to overcome the drawing objections, which are withdrawn. The amendments along have required adjustment to the rejection to address the claim amendments themselves. The remarks are not persuasive as Burkhart clearly teaches that additively manufactured conduits in the manifold that are extending from below the substrate are present in Burkhart, and accordingly the remarks/amendment cannot be found persuasive. See Burkhart ph 0060 and at least figure 11 and manifold 1100 which extends below the substrate 122 as discussed in Burkhart. An alternative obviousness rejection has been provided to address any implied connection from the bottom of the substrate to the additively manufactured conduits. This action must be made Final.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1)/(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Burkhart (US 2017/0204989);
Claim(s) 3, 11, 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Burkhart, as applied to claims 1 and 9 above.
Burkhart discloses in claim 1: (see at least annotated figure 1 below)
PNG
media_image1.png
850
1384
media_image1.png
Greyscale
A gas delivery system (assembly for semiconductor processing including a gas box ph 0053) comprising: a substrate (122a-d figure 1 is a substrate) comprising: additively manufactured conduits that at least partially protrude from a lower surface of the substrate (the substrate 122a-d is positioned above and connected to the additively manufactured manifold, for example as seen in figure 11, at 1100, where the positioning and connection to the substrate is discussed in ph 0060); a first substrate portion (3002a-d) of a first gas stick (100 a-d is a gas stick per ph 0055-0063 where multiple gas sticks may be arranged side by side in a linear fashion, taken as herein (a-d) for purposes of discussion), the first substrate portion comprising a first inlet (102a-d) configured to receive a first gas (a first process gas per ph 0053 for 102a-d for example), wherein the first gas stick is to control first flow of the first gas (via MFC 118 a-d); and a second substrate portion (3002a-d) of a second gas stick (100a-d), the second substrate portion comprising a second inlet (102a-d) configured to receive a second gas (a second process gas per ph 0053 for 102a-d for example), wherein the second gas stick is to control second flow (via 118a-d) of the second gas separate from the first flow of the first gas, and wherein the gas delivery system is to provide the first gas and the second gas to a chamber of a substrate processing system (per ph 0053);
if it could be persuasively argued that Burkhart does not explicitly disclose: first and second (or for that matter more than one gas stick with substate and substrate portion); and that additively manufactured conduits are connected to the substrate and that at least partially protrude from a lower surface of the substrate considering that Burkhart teaches: it is standard to align multiple gas sticks on a manifold block for the purpose of controlling multiple fluids to a chamber, (ph 0055); and one of ordinary skill in the art would consider four or more a multiplicity; and considering further that Burkhart teaches: connecting the manifold below the substrate [ph 0060] for the purpose of routing fluid to and from the gas stick for processing purposes;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to provide Burkart as taught and/or suggested therein with four or more gas sticks each with substrate and substrate portion as aligned on a manifold block, all for the purpose of controlling multiple fluids to a chamber, especially since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960);
Accordingly, it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to provide as taught suggested in Burkhart, connecting additively manufactured conduits to the substrate and that at least partially protrude from a lower surface of the substrate, all for the purpose of routing fluid to and from the gas stick for processing purposes.
Burkhart discloses (or as modified for the reasons discussed above) in claims 2 and 14: The gas delivery system of claim 1, wherein the chamber is a processing chamber, a factory interface, or a load lock (ph 0053, a semiconductor gas processing chamber, the use of “or” considered an indication of alternative grouping under MPEP 2131.)
Burkhart discloses (or as modified for the reasons discussed above) in claims 3 and 11: The gas delivery system of claim 1, Burkart figure 1 does not disclose, although Burkhart teaches in ph 0074: the first substrate portion and the second substrate portion [may be] additively manufactured as an integral substrate (for the purpose of providing a higher functioning and more compact less expensive device.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to provide as taught in Burkhart ph 0074 for the embodiment of Burkhart Fig.1, the first substrate portion and the second substrate portion are additively manufactured as an integral substrate, as taught in Burkhart ph 0074, and for the purpose of providing a higher functioning and more compact less expensive device.
Burkhart discloses (or as modified for the reasons discussed above) in claim 4: The gas delivery system of claim 1, wherein the first substrate portion and the second substrate portion form a plurality of integral flow paths between the first substrate portion and the second substrate portion (via 102a-d, 124, 126 etc...)
Burkhart discloses (or as modified for the reasons discussed above) in claim 5: The gas delivery system of claim 4, wherein a first flow path (102a-d) of the plurality of integral flow paths is disposed above a second flow path (124/126) of the plurality of integral flow paths.
Burkhart discloses (or as modified for the reasons discussed above) in claim 6: The gas delivery system of claim 1 further comprising a plurality of components ((104/106/108/110/112/114/116/118/120)a-d) comprising one or more of a check valve, filter, nozzle, regulator, shut-off valve, pneumatic valve, check valve, mass flow controller, or manual valve (ph 0057-0059 the use of “or” considered an indication of alternative grouping under MPEP 2131), wherein one or more of the plurality of components are mounted on the first substrate portion (3002a-d).
Burkhart discloses (or as modified for the reasons discussed above) in claim 7: The gas delivery system of claim 6, wherein a base portion (at 3004a-d) of at least one of the plurality of components is integral to the first substrate portion, wherein the base portion comprises a component inlet and a component outlet (each of the plurality of components has an inlet and outlet (for example at 3006a-d and 3008a-d for 118a-d) in the respective base portion integral to the first substrate portion.)
Burkhart discloses (or as modified for the reasons discussed above) in claim 8: The gas delivery system of claim 1 further comprising: a first outlet (at 3010a-d)of the first substrate portion of the first gas stick, the first outlet configured to provide the first gas to the chamber of the substrate processing system (as necessarily the case per ph 0053.)
Burkhart discloses in claim 9: A gas delivery system (assembly for semiconductor processing including a gas box ph 0053) comprising: a substrate (122a-d figure 1 is a substrate) comprising: additively manufactured conduits that at least partially protrude from a lower surface of the substrate (the substrate 122a-d is positioned above and connected to the additively manufactured manifold, for example as seen in figure 11, at 1100, where the positioning and connection to the substrate is discussed in ph 0060); a first substrate portion (3002a-d) of a first gas stick (100 a-d is a gas stick per ph 0055-0063 where multiple gas sticks may be arranged side by side in a linear fashion, taken as herein (a-d) for purposes of discussion), the first substrate portion comprising: a first inlet (102a-d) configured to receive a first gas (a first gas per ph 0053 for 102a-d for example); and a first base portion (at 3004a-d) of a first component (118a-d), the first base portion comprising a first component inlet (3006a-d) and a first component outlet (3008a-d); and a first upper portion (at 3012a-d) of the first component, the first upper portion being disposed on the first base portion, wherein the first upper portion is configured to control first flow of the first gas to a chamber of a substrate processing system (118a-d is a MFC – mass flow controller, per ph 0059.)
if it could be persuasively argued that Burkhart does not explicitly disclose: first and second (or for that matter more than one gas stick with substate and substrate portion); and that additively manufactured conduits are connected to the substrate and that at least partially protrude from a lower surface of the substrate considering that Burkhart teaches: it is standard to align multiple gas sticks on a manifold block for the purpose of controlling multiple fluids to a chamber, (ph 0055); and one of ordinary skill in the art would consider four or more a multiplicity; and considering further that Burkhart teaches: connecting the manifold below the substrate [ph 0060] for the purpose of routing fluid to and from the gas stick for processing purposes;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to provide Burkart as taught and/or suggested therein with four or more gas sticks each with substrate and substrate portion as aligned on a manifold block, all for the purpose of controlling multiple fluids to a chamber, especially since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960)
Accordingly, it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to provide as taught suggested in Burkhart, connecting additively manufactured conduits to the substrate and that at least partially protrude from a lower surface of the substrate, all for the purpose of routing fluid to and from the gas stick for processing purposes.
Burkhart discloses (or as modified for the reasons discussed above) in claim 10: The gas delivery system of claim 9, wherein the substrate further comprises: a second substrate portion (3002a-d) of a second gas stick (100a-d), the second substrate portion comprising: a second inlet (102a-d) configured to receive a second gas (a second process gas per ph 0053 for 102a-d for example); and a second base portion (at 3004a-d) of a second component (118a-d), the second base portion comprising a second component inlet (3006a-d) and a second component outlet (3008a-d), wherein the gas delivery system further comprises a second upper portion (3012a-d) of the second component, the second upper portion being disposed on the second base portion (as shown), wherein the second upper portion is configured to control second flow of the second gas (118a-d is a MFC – mass flow controller, per ph 0059.)
Burkhart discloses (or as modified for the reasons discussed above) in claim 12: The gas delivery system of claim 10, wherein the first substrate portion and the second substrate portion form a plurality of integral flow paths between the first substrate portion and the second substrate portion (via 102a-d, 124, 126 etc...), and wherein a first flow path (102a-d) of the plurality of integral flow paths is disposed above a second flow path (124/126) of the plurality of integral flow paths.
Burkhart discloses (or as modified for the reasons discussed above) in claim 13: The gas delivery system of claim 9, wherein the first component comprises one or more of a check valve, filter, nozzle, regulator, shut-off valve, pneumatic valve, check valve, mass flow controller, or manual valve (((104/106/108/110/112/114/116/118/120) a-d) and see ph 0057-0059 the use of “or” considered an indication of alternative grouping under MPEP 2131.)
Burkhart discloses in claim 15: A gas delivery system (assembly for semiconductor processing including a gas box ph 0053) comprising: additively manufactured conduits that at least partially protrude from a lower surface of the substrate (the substrate 122a-d is positioned above and connected to the additively manufactured manifold, for example as seen in figure 11, at 1100, where the positioning and connection to the substrate is discussed in ph 0060); [a] manufactured substrate (122a-d figure 1 is a substrate) comprising: a first substrate portion (3002a-d) of a first gas stick (100 a-d is a gas stick per ph 0055-0063 where multiple gas sticks may be arranged side by side in a linear fashion, taken as herein (a-d) for purposes of discussion), the first substrate portion comprising a first inlet (102a-d) configured to receive a first gas (a first process gas per ph 0053 for 102a-d for example), the first substrate portion forming one or more first flow paths (via 102a-d,124/126/3010a-d) configured to route the first gas; and a second substrate portion (3002a-d) of a second gas stick (100a-d), the second substrate portion comprising a second inlet (102a-d) configured to receive a second gas (a second process gas per ph 0053 for 102a-d for example), the second substrate portion forming one or more second flow paths (via 102a-d/124/126/3010a-d)configured to route at least one of the first gas or the second gas to a chamber of a substrate processing system (to 3010a-d and as necessarily discussed in ph 0053.) Burkart figure 1 does not disclose, although Burkhart ph 0074 teaches: the first substrate portion and the second substrate portion additively manufactured as an integral substrate (for the purpose of providing a higher functioning and more compact less expensive device.)
if it could be persuasively argued that Burkhart does not explicitly disclose: first and second (or for that matter more than one gas stick with substate and substrate portion); and that additively manufactured conduits are connected to the substrate and that at least partially protrude from a lower surface of the substrate considering that Burkhart teaches: it is standard to align multiple gas sticks on a manifold block for the purpose of controlling multiple fluids to a chamber, (ph 0055); and one of ordinary skill in the art would consider four or more a multiplicity; and considering further that Burkhart teaches: connecting the manifold below the substrate [ph 0060] for the purpose of routing fluid to and from the gas stick for processing purposes;
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to provide as taught in Burkhart ph 0074 for the embodiment of Burkhart Fig.1, the first substrate portion and the second substrate portion are additively manufactured as an integral substrate, as taught in Burkhart ph 0074, and for the purpose of providing a higher functioning and more compact less expensive device;
it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to provide Burkart as taught and/or suggested therein with four or more gas sticks each with substrate and substrate portion as aligned on a manifold block, all for the purpose of controlling multiple fluids to a chamber, especially since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960);
Accordingly, it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to provide as taught suggested in Burkhart, connecting additively manufactured conduits to the substrate and that at least partially protrude from a lower surface of the substrate, all for the purpose of routing fluid to and from the gas stick for processing purposes.
Burkhart discloses (as modified for the reasons discussed above) in claims 16: The gas delivery system of claim 15, wherein the chamber is a processing chamber, a factory interface, or a load lock (ph 0053, a semiconductor gas processing chamber, the use of “or” considered an indication of alternative grouping under MPEP 2131.)
Burkhart discloses (as modified for the reasons discussed above) in claims 17: The gas delivery system of claim 15, wherein the first substrate portion and the second substrate portion form a plurality of integral flow paths (via 102a-d/124/126/3010a-d) between the first substrate portion and the second substrate portion, and wherein a first flow path (102a-d) of the plurality of integral flow paths is disposed above (124/126) a second flow path of the plurality of integral flow paths (as shown.)
Burkhart discloses (as modified for the reasons discussed above) in claims 18: The gas delivery system of claim 15 further comprising a plurality of components ((104/106/108/110/112/114/116/118/120)a-d) comprising one or more of a check valve, filter, nozzle, regulator, shut-off valve, pneumatic valve, check valve, mass flow controller, or manual valve (ph 0057-0059 the use of “or” considered an indication of alternative grouping under MPEP 2131), wherein one or more of the plurality of components are mounted on the first substrate portion (3002a-d.)
Burkhart discloses (as modified for the reasons discussed above) in claims 19: The gas delivery system of claim 18, wherein a base portion (3004a-d) of at least one of the plurality of components is integral to the first substrate portion, wherein the base portion comprises a component inlet (3006a-d) and a component outlet (3008a-d.)
Burkhart discloses (as modified for the reasons discussed above) in claims 20: The gas delivery system of claim 15 further comprising: a first outlet (3010a-d) of the first substrate portion of the first gas stick, the first outlet configured to provide the first gas to the chamber (as necessarily the case per ph 0053.)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW W JELLETT, whose telephone number is 571-270-7497. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (9:30AM-6:00PM EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisors can be reached by phone. Ken Rinehart can be reached at (571)-272-4881, or Craig Schneider can be reached at (571) 272-3607. 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.
/Matthew W Jellett/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights