DETAILED ACTION
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 1, 4, 5, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Niinisto et al. (PGPub US 2003/0072882).
Regarding applicants’ claim 1, Niinisto et al. disclose the growth of Y2O3 thin films on a silicon substrate (paragraph 0062), but do not explicitly disclose a full width at half maximum (FWHM) of a diffraction peak on a (222) plane of yttrium oxide obtained by X-ray diffraction of the film being 0.25° or less, however substantially identical processes are expected to result films having substantially identical structure and properties. Applicants disclose that the thickness in one round of formation is 0.5 nm or less, and in order to achieve the full width at half maximum of 0.13° or less, it is sufficient that the thickness in one round of formation is 0.3 nm or less. In order to achieve the shift amount of diffraction peak toward the low angle side of 0.3° or less, it is sufficient that the temperature of the base material controlled to be room temperature to 200°C. Forming closed pores can be prevented by reducing the thickness in one round of formation. (applicants’ specification paragraph 0042).
Niinisto et al. disclose deposition Y2O3 in a temperature range of 175 to 450°C at 1.2Å/cycle where 200 to 400°C at rates of 1.2 to 1.35 Å/cycle are shown to succeed very well (paragraphs 0147-0149). While Niinisto et al. differs from applicants’ process by employing an ALD process, however the critical factors are substantially identical to those parameters applicants’ disclose as achieving the a FWHM of 0.13° or less. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicants’ claimed invention would have found it obvious to select from the range of parameters disclosed including a temperature of 200°C which falls within applicants’ disclosed range.
Given the formation of sustainably identical materials by processes employing substantially identical critical parameters, the resulting films would be expected to exhibit substantially identical properties including a FWHM diffraction peak on a (222) plane of .025° or less as claimed.
Regarding applicants’ claims 2 and 3, given the formation of sustainably identical materials by processes employing substantially identical critical parameters including reduction of thickness of one round of formation, the resulting films would be expected to exhibit substantially identical structures including a pore size and geometry that is within or at least so cloase to applicants claimed values as to establish a prima facie case of obviousness.
Regarding applicants’ claims 4 and 5, given the formation of sustainably identical materials by processes employing substantially identical critical parameters as discussed above with respect to claim 1, the resulting films would be expected to exhibit substantially identical structure including FWHM and shift amount that is within or at least overlapping applicants’ claimed ranges.
Regarding applicants’ claim 6, given the formation of sustainably identical materials by processes employing substantially identical critical parameters as discussed above with respect to claim 1, the resulting films would be expected to exhibit substantially identical properties including a hardness that is within or at least overlapping applicants’ claimed range.
Regarding applicants’ claim 7, Niinisto et al. do not appear to explicitly disclose the film on a member of a plasma processing device, however applicants’ disclose that it was known to form members for use in plasma processing devices which employ a yttrium oxide film (applicants’ specification, paragraph 0003). The application of known coatings to known members by processes demonstrated in the art to be suitable and for which the results are predictable is within the ordinary level of skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicants’ claimed invention would have found it obvious to deposited the yttrium oxide thin film of Niinisto et al. to a member for a plasma processing device where the application of yttrium oxide coatings to members for plasma processing devices is known.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM C KRUPICKA whose telephone number is (571)270-7086. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5pm 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, Humera Sheikh can be reached at (571)272-0604. 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.
/Adam Krupicka/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Prosecution Insights