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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/18/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 11-19 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 16-17, 19-23, 25-26 of U.S. Patent No. US 12,261,029 in view of Thomas et al. (Pub. No, US 20140097751 A1), hereafter Thomas.
Below is the table of comparison between claims in cases involved in this double patenting rejection. Differences are underlined.
Subject Application Claim Text
Application # 19/079,410 (hereafter ‘410)
Conflicting Patent Claim Text
US Patent # 12,261,029 (hereafter ‘029)
11. A method for providing radio frequency (RF) power to a coil of a processing chamber, comprising: supplying RF power to the coil using a direct drive circuit including a switch; monitoring a load current and a load voltage connected to a processing chamber; calculating load resistance based on the load current and the load voltage; comparing the load resistance to a first predetermined load resistance; and adjusting at least one of an RF power limit or an RF current limit of the direct drive circuit based on the comparing.
16. A method for providing RF power to a component of a processing chamber associated with a substrate processing system, comprising: supplying said RF power to the component using a direct drive circuit including a switch; monitoring a load current and a load voltage in the[[a]] processing chamber; calculating load resistance based on the load current and the load voltage; comparing the load resistance to a first predetermined load resistance; and adjusting at least one of an RF power limit and an RF current limit of the direct drive circuit based on the comparison; wherein the first predetermined load resistance is selected based on a resistance during at least one non-plasma condition.
12. The method of claim 11, further comprising arranging a voltage/current (VI) probe to connect to the processing chamber and generating the load current and load voltage using the VI probe.
17. The method of claim 16, further comprising arranging a voltage/current (VI) probe in the processing chamber and generating the load current and load voltage using the VI probe.
13. The method of claim 11, wherein the first predetermined load resistance is selected based on a resistance during at least one non-plasma condition.
16. “wherein the first predetermined load resistance is selected based on a resistance during at least one non-plasma condition”.
14. The method of claim 13, wherein the at least one non-plasma condition corresponds to plasma failing to ignite, or corresponds to plasma dropping out after process gas flow to the process chamber is turned off.
19. The method of claim 16, wherein the at least one non- plasma condition corresponds to plasma failing to ignite.
20. the method of claim 16], wherein the at least one non- plasma condition corresponds to plasma dropping out after process gas flow to the process chamber is turned off
15. The method of claim 11, further comprising reducing the at least one of the RF power limit and the RF current limit of the direct drive circuit in response to the load resistance being less than or equal to a first predetermined load resistance.
21. The method of claim 16, further comprising reducing the at least one of the RF power limit and the RF current limit of the direct drive circuit in response to the load resistance being less than or equal to the first predetermined load resistance.
16. The method of claim 15, further comprising shutting down the direct drive circuit in response to the load resistance being less than or equal to the first predetermined load resistance for a period greater than a predetermined period.
22. The method of claim 21, further comprising shutting down the direct drive circuit in response to the load resistance being less than or equal to the first predetermined load resistance for a period greater than a predetermined period.
17. The method of claim 11, further comprising increasing the at least one of the RF power limit and the RF current limit of the direct drive circuit in response to the load resistance being less than or equal to a first predetermined load resistance.
23. The method of claim 16, further comprising increasing the at least one of the RF power limit and the RF current limit of the direct drive circuit in response to the load resistance being less than or equal to the first predetermined load resistance.
18. The method of claim 11, further comprising: selecting at least one of a first RF power limit and a first RF current limit of the direct drive circuit in response to the load resistance being less than or equal to a first predetermined load resistance and at least one of a second RF power limit and a second RF current limit of the direct drive circuit in response the load resistance being greater than the first predetermined load resistance, wherein the at least one of the first RF power limit and the first RF current limit of the direct drive circuit is less than the at least one of the second RF power limit and the second RF current limit of the direct drive circuit, respectively; and shutting down the direct drive circuit in response to the load resistance being less than the first predetermined load resistance for a period greater than a predetermined period.
25. The method of claim 16, further comprising: selecting at least one of a first RF power limit and a first RF current limit of the direct drive circuit in response to the load resistance being less than or equal to the first predetermined load resistance and at least one of a second RF power limit and a second RF current limit of the direct drive circuit in response the load resistance being greater than the first predetermined load resistance, wherein the at least one of a first RF power limit and the first RF current limit of the direct drive circuit is less than the at least one of the second RF power limit and the second RF current limit of the direct drive circuit, respectively; and shutting down the direct drive circuit in response to the load resistance being less than the first predetermined load resistance for a period greater than a predetermined period.
19. The method of claim 11, further comprising: selecting at least one of a first RF power limit and a first RF current limit of the direct drive circuit in response to the load resistance being less than or equal to a first predetermined load resistance and at least one of a second RF power limit and a second RF current limit of the direct drive circuit in response to the load resistance being greater than the first predetermined load resistance, wherein the at least one of the first RF power limit and the first RF current limit of the direct drive circuit is greater than the at least one of the second RF power limit and the second RF current limit of the direct drive circuit, respectively; and shutting down the direct drive circuit in response to the load resistance being less than or equal to the first predetermined load resistance for a period greater than a predetermined period.
26. The method of claim 16, further comprising: selecting at least one of a first RF power limit and a first RF current limit of the direct drive circuit in response to the load resistance being less than or equal to the first predetermined load resistance and at least one of a second RF power limit and a second RF current limit of the direct drive circuit in response to the load resistance being greater than the first predetermined load resistance, wherein the at least one of a first RF power limit and the first RF current limit of the direct drive circuit is greater than the at least one of the second RF power limit and the second RF current limit of the direct drive circuit, respectively; and shutting down the direct drive circuit in response to the load resistance being less than or equal to the first predetermined load resistance for a period greater than a predetermined period.
Regarding claim 11, patent ‘029 (claim 16) recites all the limitations except the following feature as discussed below.
Patent ‘029 does not disclose the component is a coil to which RF power is provided.
Thomas teaches providing RF power to a coil of a processing chamber (FIG. 1, induction coil 106 and paragraph [0020], “The induction coil 106 is supplied by a generator 108. In some implementations, the generator 108 is a medium frequency RF (MFRF) generator”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to modify Patent ‘029 in view of Thomas to incorporate a coil of a processing chamber for maximize power transfer and minimize reflections from the load (Thomas, paragraph [0026]).
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 11-12, 15, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gorokhovsky (Pub. No.: US 11834204 B1) in view of Thomas et al. (Pub. No.: US 20140097751 A1), hereafter Thomas.
Regarding claim 11, Gorokhovsky teaches a method for providing RF power to a coil of a substrate processing system (FIG. 3m1, substrate chamber 10), comprising:
supplying RF power to the component using a direct drive circuit (FIG. 3m1, RF generator 532a, 532b, DC arc power supplies 450c, 450d, diodes 470a, 470b and switches 460a, 460b) including a switch (FIG. 3m1, switch 460a, 460b, 460c, 460d);
monitoring a load current and a load voltage in a processing chamber (FIG. 3m and column 28 lines 9-18, “the remote arc discharge may, when the switches 460a and 460b are closed, be ignited between magnetron anodes 150 and cathode target 12 in parallel with ignition of the remote arc discharge between cathode target 12 and magnetron grid-anodes 601, with wire electrodes 603 providing dense plasma in the area of magnetron sputtering discharge adjacent to magnetron target 32. The current of the remote arc discharge is typically in the range from 50 A to 500 A but may be increased up to 10 kA” and lines 1-5, “The voltage amplitude of the positive high voltage pulses generated by switching DC pulse power supply 531 typically ranges from 0.1 kV to 1 MV”);
Gorokhovsky does not explicitly disclose providing RF power to a coil of a substrate; calculating load resistance based on the load current and the load voltage; comparing the load resistance to a first predetermined load resistance; and adjusting at least one of an RF power limit and an RF current limit of the direct drive circuit based on the comparison.
Thomas teaches providing RF power to a coil of a substrate (FIG. 1, induction coil 106); calculating load resistance based on the load current and the load voltage (paragraph [0025], “R is the resistance and X is the reactance. Thus, each transition from one process step or stage to the next can cause both the resistance and the reactance of the load on the generator 108 to change”); comparing the load resistance to a first predetermined load resistance (FIG. 2, Detector 224 and controller 228); and adjusting at least one of an RF power limit and an RF current limit of the direct drive circuit based on the comparison (paragraph [0041], “the auto-matching network 210 tunes (e.g., varies the capacitance of) the tuning element 226 to effect a change in the real part of the impedance of the load--the resistance of the load. Ideally, the auto-matching network 210 tunes the tuning element 226 until the resistance of the load matches the resistance of the generator 208”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gorokhovsky in view of Thomas to incorporate feature of adjust at least one of an RF power limit and an RF current limit of the direct drive circuit based on the comparison of load resistance which advantageously utilize the tuning element(s) in an auto-matching network 110 to adjust the resistance--the real part of the impedance (the auto-matching network may in some instances also affect the reactance) (Thomas, paragraph [0033]).
Regarding claim 12, Gorokhovsky as modified above further teaches arranging a voltage/current (VI) probe (Thomas, FIG. 2, auto-matching network 210) in the processing chamber (Thomas, FIG. 2, ICP Chamber 202) and generating the load current and load voltage using the VI probe (Thomas, FIG. 2, and paragraph [0034], “An auto-matching network 210 receives the supply signal VS and delivers an impedance-matched signal VL to the induction coil 206. The generator 208 is further configured to detect (or otherwise determine based on one or more sensors or other feedback mechanisms) the forward power output from the generator as well as the power reflected back to the generator from the load” here power includes the load current and load voltage).
Regarding claim 15, Gorokhovsky as modified above further teaches reducing the at least one of the RF power limit and the RF current limit of the direct drive circuit in response to the load resistance being less than or equal to a first predetermined load resistance (paragraph [0027], “the impedance from the matching network 110 itself, among other possible contributions, some or all of which are dependent on the frequency and power level of the supply signal from the generator 108. The matching network 110 ideally functions to compensate for the difference between the resistance of the generator 108 and the resistance of the load”).
Regarding claim 17, Gorokhovsky as modified above further teaches increasing the at least one of the RF power limit and the RF current limit of the direct drive circuit in response to the load resistance being less than or equal to a first predetermined load resistance (paragraph [0027], “the impedance from the matching network 110 itself, among other possible contributions, some or all of which are dependent on the frequency and power level of the supply signal from the generator 108. The matching network 110 ideally functions to compensate for the difference between the resistance of the generator 108 and the resistance of the load”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-10 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 1, the prior art fails to teach or reasonably suggest a direct drive circuit comprising “the direct drive circuit includes a clock generator to generate a clock signal at a frequency to drive a control terminal of the switch, the switch connected to a direct current (DC) supply to supply a voltage level, wherein an output node of the switch is connected to a capacitor that couples to said coil for providing said RF power”, as required in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Dependent claims 2-10 are allowed by virtue of its dependency.
Claim 20 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 20 is objected to as being dependent upon double patenting rejection of base claim 11.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYED M KAISER whose telephone number is (571)272-9612. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 a.m.-6 p.m..
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, Abdullah Riyami can be reached at 571-270-3119. 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.
/SYED M KAISER/ Examiner, Art Unit 2831 /ABDULLAH A RIYAMI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights