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 .
Claims 1-5 are pending in this application.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 01/22/2025 and 02/09/2026 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 C.F.R. § 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS has/have been considered by the examiner.
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.
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) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Redeker et al. U.S. Patent Application 2003/0180459 (hereinafter “Redeker”) and further in view of Cho et al. U.S. Patent Application 2025/0226257 (hereinafter “Cho”).
Regarding claim 1, Redeker teaches an electrostatic chuck (refer to fig.3) comprising: a dielectric substrate (i.e. electrostatic chuck 32)(fig.3)(refer also to [0004] and [0023]) including a placement surface (i.e. surface 70)(fig.3) on which an object to be attracted is placed (refer to [0031]); an RF electrode (i.e. RF electrode 64)(fig.3) provided inside the dielectric substrate (implicit)(refer to fig.3); and a base plate (i.e. pedestal 60)(fig.3) joined to the dielectric substrate (implicit)(refer to fig.3 and [0004]), wherein the dielectric substrate includes a protrusion section (i.e. protrusion section in the figure below)(fig.3) protruding outward beyond a joined surface of the base plate when viewed from a direction perpendicular to the placement surface (implicit)(refer to fig.3), and a part of the RF electrode is provided in the protrusion section (implicit)(refer to RF electrode 64 and protrusion section in the figure below)(fig.3); however, Redeker does not teach wherein the base plate is made of metal. However, Cho teaches wherein the base plate is made of metal (refer to [0046] and [0047]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electrostatic chuck of Redeker to include the metal base plate of Cho to provide the advantage of using a common material for the base plate which increases the strength of the electrostatic chuck to be able to withstand large chucking forces without breaking/cracking.
PNG
media_image1.png
358
641
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Redeker and Cho teach the electrostatic chuck according to claim 1, further comprising an attraction electrode (i.e. Redeker chucking electrode 66)(fig.3)(i.e. Cho chuck electrode layer 114A)(fig.2) provided inside the dielectric substrate (implicit)(refer to Redeker fig.3 and Cho fig.2), wherein a part of the attraction electrode is provided in the protrusion section when viewed from the direction perpendicular to the placement surface (implicit)(refer to Redeker chucking electrode 66 and protrusion section in the figure above)(fig.3).
Regarding claim 3, Redeker and Cho teach the electrostatic chuck according to claim 2; however, Redeker does not teach wherein the RF electrode is provided in a range where an outer circumferential edge of the RF electrode is positioned on an outer circumferential side of an outer circumferential edge of the attraction electrode when viewed from the direction perpendicular to the placement surface. However, Cho teaches wherein the RF electrode is provided in a range where an outer circumferential edge of the RF electrode is positioned on an outer circumferential side of an outer circumferential edge of the attraction electrode when viewed from the direction perpendicular to the placement surface (refer to Cho chuck electrode layer 114A and RF electrode layer 114C). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electrostatic chuck of Redeker to include the RF electrode position in relation to the attraction electrode of Cho to provide the advantage of providing even plasma generation over the entire surface of the electrostatic chuck.
Regarding claim 4, Redeker and Cho teach the electrostatic chuck according to claim 2, wherein the RF electrode is provided in a range where an outer circumferential edge of the RF electrode does not protrude beyond an outer circumferential edge of the attraction electrode when viewed from the direction perpendicular to the placement surface (implicit)(refer to Redeker fig.3).
Regarding claim 5, Redeker and Cho teach the electrostatic chuck according to claim 1, further comprising: an insulating film (i.e. Cho ceramic coating layer 126)(fig.2) on the joined surface (implicit)(refer to Cho fig.2) and a lateral surface of the base plate (implicit)(refer to Cho fig.2), the dielectric substrate being spaced from the base plate by a portion of the insulating film (implicit).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN J COMBER whose telephone number is (571)272-6133. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm 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, Thienvu V. Tran can be reached at 571-270-1276. 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.
/KEVIN J COMBER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights