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 .
Priority
Benefit of earlier filing date of 07/22/2020 of provisional application No. 63/055,148 is acknowledged as required by 35 U.S.C. 119.
Claim Objections
Claims 14 and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 14, line 12, “a lift pin” should read --the lift pin--.
Claim 18, line 15, “a lift pin” should read --the lift pin--. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Fukuda et al. (US 6148762 A) hereinafter Fukuda.
Regarding claim 1, Fukuda teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. below) a lift pin interface in an electrostatic chuck (susceptor 13), comprising: a dielectric plate (dielectric plate comprises heating plate coated alumina 25a and downwardly protruded upper guide 30) having a support surface (top surface) for a substrate (substrate 16); a conductive plate (conductive plate comprises 26, 27, 33) disposed beneath the dielectric plate and having an opening formed therethrough, wherein the dielectric plate includes a protrusion (30) extending into the opening in the conductive plate; and a lift pin guide (lower guide 31) disposed in the opening, wherein the lift pin guide includes one or more features that extend from an upper surface of the lift pin guide and that overlap with the protrusion of the dielectric plate, and wherein the lift pin guide includes a passageway to accommodate a lift pin (lift pin comprises 22 and 23).Claim 1 in preamble recites a lift pin interface that is used for an electrostatic chuck. More limiting the features and relationship between the lift pin and the electrostatic chuck mount to mere components associated with the intended use of the recited device (a lift pin interface device). See, e.g., In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (anticipation rejection affirmed based on Board’s factual finding that the reference dispenser (a spout disclosed as useful for purposes such as dispensing oil from an oil can) would be capable of dispensing popcorn in the manner set forth in appellant’s claim 1 (a dispensing top for dispensing popcorn in a specified manner) and cases cited therein. See also MPEP § 2112 - MPEP § 2112.02. Thus, the prior art only needs to teach the recited components of the lift pin interface device.Note that dielectric plate is interpreted to be the alumina coated heating plate and downwardly protruding upper guide 30 and it is known that alumina is a dielectric ceramic with excellent dielectric properties (see Elsevier Journal below).
PNG
media_image1.png
1393
946
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
946
719
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Fukuda teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above and below) the one or more features include a shoulder.
PNG
media_image3.png
274
189
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Fukuda teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) the one or more features include a single outer shoulder that surrounds the protrusion (surrounding lower portion of protrusion 30 of the dielectric plate).
Regarding claim 11, Fukuda teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) an insulative coating disposed atop an upper surface of the conductive plate (par. 14: “all the components constituting the susceptor pin 14 are composed of the insulating alumina”).
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 12, 14, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukuda in view of Ishimura (JP 2017028049 A).
Regarding claim 12, Fukuda teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) Fukuda does not teach an elastomer bond layer disposed atop the insulative coating.
Ishimura (reproduced and annotated Figs. below) teaches such elastomer bond (”silicon resin”) between plates a, b for adhesion purposes.
PNG
media_image4.png
613
1058
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to add elastomer bond layer between conductive plate and dielectric plate. Doing so would improve bonding between them.
Regarding claim 14, Fukuda teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) an electrostatic chuck (susceptor 13), comprising: a dielectric plate (dielectric plate comprises heating plate coated alumina 25a and downwardly protruded upper guide 30) having a support surface (top surface) for a substrate (substrate 16); a conductive plate (conductive plate comprises 26, 27, 33) disposed beneath the dielectric plate and having an opening formed therethrough, wherein the dielectric plate includes a protrusion (30) extending into the opening in the conductive plate; and a lift pin guide (lower guide 31) disposed in the opening, wherein the lift pin guide includes one or more features that extend from an upper surface of the lift pin guide and that overlap with the protrusion of the dielectric plate, wherein the lift pin guide includes a passageway to accommodate a lift pin (lift pin comprises 22 and 23),and wherein the dielectric plate and the protrusion include openings (ventral openings for passage of pin main body 22) aligned with the passageway in the lift pin guide to form a lift pin opening such that a lift pin (lift pin comprises pin main body 22 and shaft 23) can move sufficiently to extend beyond the support surface of the dielectric plate (see Fig. 4) and to retract beneath the support surface (see Fig. 2). Note that dielectric plate is interpreted to be the alumina coated heating plate and downwardly protruding upper guide 30 and it is known that alumina is a dielectric ceramic with excellent dielectric properties (see Elsevier Journal above).However Fukuda does not show electrode disposed in the dielectric plate.
Ishimura teaches a substrate chuck with such electrode inside chuck portion 2 for substrate attraction.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to add substrate attraction electrode inside dielectric plate of Fukuda. Doing so would improve substrate holding during process.
Regarding claim 17, Fukuda teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) an insulative coating disposed atop an upper surface of the conductive plate (par. 14: “all the components constituting the susceptor pin 14 are composed of the insulating alumina”). However Fukuda does not teach an elastomer bond layer disposed atop the insulative coating.
Ishimura (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) teaches such elastomer bond (”silicon resin”) between plates a, b for adhesion purposes.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to add elastomer bond layer between conductive plate and dielectric plate. Doing so would improve bonding between them.
Regarding claim 18, Fukuda teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) a substrate support including an electrostatic chuck (susceptor 13), comprising: a conductive plate (conductive plate comprises 26, 27, 33) having an opening formed therethrough; a dielectric plate (dielectric plate comprises heating plate coated alumina 25a and downwardly protruded upper guide 30) having a support surface (top surface) for a substrate (substrate 16) coupled to the conductive plate, wherein the dielectric plate includes a protrusion (30) extending into the opening in the conductive plate; and a lift pin guide (lower guide 31) disposed in the opening of the conductive plate, wherein the lift pin guide includes one or more features that extend from an upper surface of the lift; but Fukuda does not teach an elastomer bond layer disposed between the conductive plate and the dielectric plate; one or more electrodes disposed in the dielectric plate and configured to be coupled to a chucking power supply.
Ishimura (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) teaches such elastomer bond (”silicon resin”) between plates a, b for adhesion purposes and an electrode inside chuck portion 2 coupled to a chucking power supply (power feeding terminal 15) for substrate attraction.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to add substrate attraction electrode inside dielectric plate of Fukuda. Doing so would improve substrate holding during process and to add elastomer bond layer between conductive plate and dielectric plate. Doing so would improve bonding between them.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukuda in view of Hori (JP 2020109806 A).
Regarding claim 13, Fukuda does not teach a compliant, gap-filling material disposed between an outer periphery of the protrusion and a surrounding portion of the opening.
Hori teaches compliant material 5, 6 between outer periphery of 3 and inner portion of 1 and 2 for bonding and sealing purposes.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to add gap filling material between an outer periphery of the protrusion and a surrounding portion of the opening. Doing so would improve bonding and sealing.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukuda in view of Takumi (CN 112673089 A).
Regarding claim 5, Fukuda does not teach an O-ring disposed on the upper surface of the lift pin guide between the lift pin guide and the protrusion.
Takumi teaches sealing O-rings (36, 38) for sealing purposes between two plates.
PNG
media_image5.png
903
911
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 add sealing O-ring between the upper surface of the lift pin guide and the lower surface of the protrusion. Doing so would improve sealing in-between.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is 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.
Claim 3 is allowable for disclosing “the protrusion in the dielectric plate includes a countersink that mates with the shoulder”.
The closest prior art to the claimed invention of claim 3 is Fukuda. However Fukuda does not have the claimed countersink.
Claims 6-10 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.
Claim 6 is allowable for disclosing “the one or more features include two shoulders, and wherein the protrusion extends between the two shoulders”.
The closest prior art to the claimed invention of claim 6 is Fukuda. However the feature of the lift pin guide of Fukuda has a single feature.
Claims 7-10 are allowable due to dependency on allowable claim 6.
Claim 15 is allowable for disclosing “the protrusion in the dielectric plate includes a countersink that mates with the shoulder”. These limitations, with other claimed limitations in a whole, make the instant invention neither anticipated nor rendered obvious by the best prior art in record.
The closest prior art to the claimed invention of claim 15 is Fukuda. Fukuda teaches the one or more features include a single outer shoulder that surrounds the protrusion (lower portion of protrusion is surrounded by the feature of the lift pin guide. However Fukuda does not teach the protrusion in the dielectric plate includes a countersink that mates with the shoulder.
Claim 16 is allowable for disclosing “the one or more features include two shoulders, wherein the two shoulders include an inner shoulder disposed around the passageway and an outer shoulder that surrounds the protrusion, and wherein the protrusion includes a countersink that mates with the inner shoulder”.
The closest prior art to the claimed invention of claim 16 is Fukuda. However the feature of the lift pin guide of Fukuda does not have the claimed countersink and two shoulders.
Claim 19 is allowable for disclosing “a chucking power supply coupled to the one or more electrodes; an RF power supply coupled to the conductive plate; and an insulative plate disposed beneath the conductive plate to insulate the conductive plate from ground”.
The closest prior art to the claimed invention of claim 19 is Fukuda. However Fukuda does not teach the claimed chucking power supply and insulative plate.
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
