CTNF 19/042,816 CTNF 85139 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 1-4,6-7,10-12, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Ohashi et al. (JP 2006-261541) . Regarding Claim 1, Ohashi et al. (JP’541) teaches a substrate support comprising: a body configured to support a substrate during processing of the substrate, wherein the body comprises a plurality of plates comprising a top plate 16, one or more intermediate plates 13-15 and a bottom plate 12, wherein the plurality of plates are arranged to form a stack, and wherein the one or more intermediate plates are disposed on the bottom plate below the top plate; and a first thermal void 28 and a second thermal void 30, each of which being at least partially defined by the one or more intermediate plates, wherein a cross-section vertically through the first thermal void comprises first horizontally extending sides and first vertically extending sides, the first thermal void is horizontally oriented such that the first horizontally extending sides are longer than the first vertically extending sides, a cross-section vertically through the second thermal void comprises second vertically extending sides and second horizontally extending sides, the second thermal void is vertically oriented such that the second vertically extending sides are longer than the second horizontally extending sides, and the first thermal void and the second thermal void are annular-shaped (Figs. 3-5; [0026,0029]). Regarding Claim 2, JP’541 teaches the one or more intermediate plates comprise a plurality of intermediate plates; and the first thermal void and the second thermal void are each defined by each of the plurality of intermediate plates ( see citations in Claim 1 above). Regarding Claim 3, JP’541 teaches that the first thermal void is defined by two of the one or more intermediate plates ( e.g. top surface of plate 13 and extending into 14; and the second thermal void is defined by the top plate 16 and the two of the one or more intermediate plates (14-15) (Fig. 3). Regarding Claim 4, JP’541 teaches that the first thermal void and the second thermal void are concentric (Fig. 4). Regarding Claim 6, in JP’541, the one or more intermediate plates comprise a first intermediate plate ( e.g. 14 can be considered the first intermediate plate and 13 the bottom plate, since 13 is the first susceptor pate) and a second intermediate plate 15; the second intermediate plate is disposed on the first intermediate plate; and the second thermal void is defined by an upper recessed surface of the first intermediate plate 14 and a lower recessed surface of the top plate 16 (Figs. 3-4). Regarding Claim 7, JP’541 teaches that the first thermal void and the second thermal void are concentric with two or more of the plurality of plates (Figs. 3-4). Regarding Claims 10-11, the intended use recitation is not given patentable weight for the claimed apparatus, which is capable of the intended use. Regarding Claim 12, in JP’541 the first thermal void can be considered to defined by only two of the plurality of plates ( e.g. top surface of 13 and extending into 14); and the second thermal void can be considered to be defined by only three of the plurality of plates ( e.g. extending into 16 and into 15 and 14), depending on what is required for “defining,” which is not specifically defined (Figs. 3 and 4). Regarding Claim 18, a height of the first thermal void is defined by two of the plurality of plates; and a height of the second thermal void is defined by three of the plurality of plates (Figs. 3-5) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 8-9, 13, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohashi et al. (JP 2006-261541) in view of Moslehi (US 6,138,745) . Regarding Claims 8-9, 13, and 14, JP’541 fails to teach a plurality of plates comprising first radially-extending channels and second radially-extending channels. Moslehi (US’745) teaches annular channels, first radially-extending channels, and second radially-extending channels 90 and a plurality of circumferential channels or grooves 88 is capable of transferring an exclusion gas between the first radially-extending channels/ grooves and the second radially-extending channels/grooves for better heat transfer (Figs. 3,6; col. 1, line 59-66; col. 7, lines 3-15; col. 7, line 63 to col. 8, line 16; col. 9, lines 16-26). The plurality of radially extending channels fluidically couple the annular channel to the first thermal void, and the thermal void is capable of transferring gas under vacuum, because of seals (Abstract; col. 9, 65 through col. 10, line 2). In addition, because the limitation “transfers gas under vacuum” recites an intended use without adding any additional structural features, it is considered an intended use recitation, not given significant patentable weight. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to modify the apparatus of JP’541 with first and second radially-extending channels or grooves 90 in the plurality of plates so that the concentric groove/channel of JP’541 is capable of transferring an exclusion gas between the first radially-extending and second radially-extending channels/ grooves (including under vacuum conditions), because US’745 suggests such structures and evidences recited capabilities to improve heat transfer . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohashi et al. (JP 2006-261541) . Regarding Claim 15, JP’541 teaches three annular-shaped thermal voids arranged in a concentric pattern and the four annular-shaped thermal voids include the first and second thermal voids (Fig. 4). JP’541 fails to teach four annular-shaped thermal voids. A fourth annular-shaped thermal void is prima facie obvious duplication of parts and would also be an obvious modification to achieve an optimal temperature profile with finer control of temperature over the surface. Regarding Claim 17, JP’541 teaches that the plurality of plates comprise an inner heating element and an outer heating element; a first thermal void 131 and a second thermal void 101 or 102 are both disposed above an area between the inner heating element and the outer heating element; and a second thermal void is disposed above an area between the inner heating element heating element and the outer heating element (Figs. 7-8; [0065-0066]). JP’541 fails to teach that the plurality of plates comprise an inner heating element, a middle heating element, and an outer heating element. However, additional thermal voids and heaters are a prima facie obvious duplication of parts and would also be an obvious modification to achieve an optimal temperature profile with finer control of temperature over the surface with more heaters and more thermal voids up to some limit in physical space . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohashi et al. (JP 2006-261541) in view of Shimai et al. (US 2019/0198363) . Regarding Claim 16, JP’541 teaches concentric heaters 103 and 104 (Figs. 7-8; [0065]). US’220 fails to teach heating coils. Shimai et al. (US’363) teach an analogous apparatus for processing a substrate, with concentric heating coils to heat the substrate (Fig. 8; [0121-0123]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to modify the apparatus of JP’541 with a plurality of concentric heating coils, because US’363 suggests concentric heating coils for a substrate chuck to heat a substrate . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohashi et al. (JP 2006-261541) in view of Tan et al. (US 2015/0380220) . Regarding Claim 20, JP’541 teaches the substrate support of claim 1, wherein the substrate support comprises two or more heating elements 103,104 ( see rejection of Claims 1 and 16 above for citations). JP’541 teaches controlling temperature [0052]. JP’541 fails to teach one or more sensors. Tan et al. (US’220) is analogous art in the field of stacked plate substrate supports. US’220 teaches a body configured to support a substrate during processing of the substrate, wherein the body comprises a plurality of plates comprising a top plate 222, a first intermediate plate 224, a second intermediate plate 226, and a bottom plate 202, wherein the plurality of plates are arranged to form a stack, and wherein the first intermediate plate is disposed on the second intermediate plate; and a thermal void 236 defined by an upper surface of the second intermediate plate, which bounds the lower end of the thermal void 236 (the thermal void is formed through the entire thickness of first intermediate plate 224) and either a lower surface of the first intermediate plate (since the thermal void begins at the lower surface of the first intermediate plate) or a lower surface of the top plate into which the thermal void extends, wherein the thermal void is annular-shaped (Figs. 2 and 4; [0033-0035,0045-0046]). The plates are concentric with each other, and the thermal void is concentric with the plates (Figures). In addition, US’220 teaches one or more sensors (thermocouple(s) [0060-0061], and wherein the one or more sensors is configured to generate one or more temperature signals [0034]; and a control module [0034] capable, based on the one or more temperature signals and a relationship between the thermal void and at least some of the plurality of plates, of controlling a supply of at least one of current or power to the two or more heating elements [0034,0037,0041,0056,0061,0064-0065]. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to modify the apparatus of JP’541 with one or more sensors, and wherein the one or more sensors is configured to generate one or more temperature signals; and a control module configured, based on the one or more temperature signals and a relationships between the first thermal void, the second thermal void and at least some of the plurality of plates, control supply of at least one of current or power to the two or more heating elements, because US’220 suggests these components for controlling a thermal profile. Double Patenting 08-33 AIA The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg , 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman , 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi , 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum , 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel , 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington , 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA/25, or PTO/AIA/26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-21 of U.S. Patent No. 12,215,420 view of Ohashi et al. (JP 2006-261541). Claim 1 teaches the structures except for the dimensions. JP’541 is analogous art for a stacked substrate susceptor (pedestal) with suggested relative dimensions of thermal voids (Figs. 3-4). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to modify the claimed apparatus of US’420 with a first and second thermal void each with the recited aspect, because JP’541 is analogous art which suggests that thermal voids with different aspects as recited are suitable to control a thermal profile of a susceptor plate and thereby the thermal profile of a substrate in an intended use. Conclusion No claim is allowed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER M WEDDLE whose telephone number is (571)270-5346. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-6:30. 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. ALEXANDER M WEDDLE Examiner Art Unit 1712 /ALEXANDER M WEDDLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712 Application/Control Number: 19/042,816 Page 2 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 19/042,816 Page 3 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 19/042,816 Page 4 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 19/042,816 Page 5 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 19/042,816 Page 6 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 19/042,816 Page 7 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 19/042,816 Page 8 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 19/042,816 Page 9 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 19/042,816 Page 10 Art Unit: 1712
Prosecution Insights