Ex Parte McChesney et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Nov 22, 2016

13421188 (P.T.A.B. Nov. 22, 2016)

United States Patent and Trademark Office
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O.Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
13/421,188 03/15/2012 Jon McChesney 1015292-000582 9579
91286 7590 11/25/2016
Harness, Dickey & Pierce, P.L.C. (Lam)
P.O. Box 828
Bloomfield Hills, MI 48303
EXAMINER
KENDALL, BENJAMIN R
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
1718
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
11/25/2016 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address(es):
s stevens @ hdp .com
troymailroom @hdp. com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte JON MCCHESNEY, THEO PANAGOPOULOS,
ALEX PATERSON, and CRAIG BLAIR
Appeal 2015-004227
Application 13/421,188
Technology Center 1700
Before TERRY J. OWENS, JAMES C. HOUSEL, and
MONTE T. SQUIRE, Administrative Patent Judges.
OWENS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
The Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s
rejection of claims 1 and 3—12. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
The Invention
The Appellants claim a plasma chamber filler kit and a plasma
chamber comprising the kit. Claim 1 is illustrative:
1. A chamber filler kit comprising at least one chamber
filler configured to be replaceably mounted in an inductively
coupled plasma chamber having a vacuum outlet in a bottom
wall and a cantilever chuck supported on a sidewall of the
chamber, the at least one chamber filler is configured to provide
a preselected lower chamber volume and conductance enabling
Appeal 2015-004227
Application 13/421,188
a particular process to be carried out in the plasma chamber, the
at least one chamber filler including a horizontally extending
side opening which fits around a horizontal arm of the
cantilever chuck and an inner frustoconical surface which is
separated from an outer surface of the chuck by a clearance
gap; wherein the at least one chamber filler has an outer wall
configured to fit against a wall of the chamber; wherein the at
least one chamber filler includes:
a top filler having an outer wall configured to fit against
the sidewall of the chamber, a frustoconical inner wall, the side
opening extending from the inner wall to the outer wall, a
horizontally planar upper end, and a horizontally planar lower
end;
a mid filler having an outer wall configured to fit against
the sidewall of the chamber, an inner wall comprising a
horizontally planar annular section extending between an upper
concave section and a lower convex section, a horizontally
planar upper end and a horizontally planar lower end, the upper
end of the mid filler having the same cross section as the lower
end of the top filler such that the inner surface of the mid filler
mates with the inner surface of the top filler and the outer wall
of the mid filler mates with the outer wall of the top filler;
a bottom filler having an outer wall configured to fit
against a bottom wall of the chamber, a cylindrical inner wall, a
horizontally planar upper end and a horizontally planar lower
end, the upper end of the bottom filler having the same cross
section as the lower end of the mid filler such that the inner
wall of the bottom filler mates with the inner wall of the mid
filler and the outer wall of the bottom filler mates with the outer
wall of the mid filler.
The References
Rinnovatore
Kennedy
Yen
Carpenter
US 5,188,672
US 6,408,786 B1
US 6,527,911 B1
US 7,234,412 B2
Feb. 23, 1993
June 25, 2002
Mar. 4, 2003
June 26, 2007
2
Appeal 2015-004227
Application 13/421,188
The Rejections
The claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as follows: claims 1,
3, 5—7, 9, and 10 over Yen in view of Carpenter, claims 4 and 8 over Yen in
view of Carpenter and Rinnovatore and claims 11 and 12 over Kennedy in
view of Yen and Carpenter.
OPINION
We reverse the rejections. We need address only claim 1, the
limitations of which are required by all of the other claims. That claim
requires a plasma chamber filler kit including a top filler which comprises an
outer wall and a frustoconical inner wall and has a side opening extending
horizontally from the frustoconical inner wall to the outer wall and fitting
around a cantilever chuck’s horizontal arm, and a mid filler having an inner
wall comprising a horizontally planar annular section extending between an
upper concave section and a lower convex section.
Yen discloses a plasma etch chamber (200) comprising a chamber
liner (166) which lines the lower region of the chamber (200) from an outer
plasma confinement structure (162) to the chamber 200’s base and exhaust
turbopump (202) and has a vertical portion which appears to fit around a
cantilever chuck/electrode structure (144)’s horizontal arm (col. 8,1. 65 —
col. 9,1. 5; col. 9,11. 19-20, 28-32; Figs. 4-5).
Carpenter teaches that deposition chamber liners can be displaced
from the internal chamber wall, “thereby defining an appreciably reduced
volume chamber within which the substrate is received for deposition”
(col. 1,11. 48—50). Carpenter discloses a deposition chamber (18)
comprising a liner apparatus (30) made of pieces (31—38) which are
removable by use of an arm (40) (col. 4,11. 21—29; col. 5,11. 41—43; Figs. 2,
3
Appeal 2015-004227
Application 13/421,188
4—6). “[T]he liner profile or shape may be formed in any configuration, for
example to optimize gas flow characteristics to the substrate” (col. 4,11. 59—
61).
The Examiner finds that Yen’s Figure 4 shows that the chamber
liner (166) comprises a frustoconical lower region (Ans. 19—20) and “a
horizontally extending side opening which fits around a horizontal arm of
the cantilever chuck, the side opening extending from the inner wall to the
outer wall of the top filler [i.e., the top portion of the chamber liner (166)]”
(Ans. 21).
The Appellants’ claim 1 requires that the side opening which fits
around the cantilever chuck’s horizontal arm extends from a frustoconical
inner wall to an outer wall. The inner wall of the portion of Yen’s chamber
liner (166) which fits around the chuck/electrode structure (144)’s horizontal
arm is vertical, not frustoconical (Fig. 4).
The Examiner finds that Yen’s chamber liner (166)’s transition from
concave to convex necessarily includes a horizontally planar annular section
(Ans. 18-19).
The Appellants challenge that finding (App. Br. 18; Reply Br. 3—5).
Consequently, we do not accept it as fact. See In re Kunzmann, 326 F.2d
424, 425 n.3 (CCPA 1964). An inherent characteristic must be inevitable,
and not merely a possibility or probability. See In re Oelrich, 666 F.2d 578,
581 (CCPA 1981). The Examiner does not establish that Yen’s chamber
liner (166)’s transition from concave to convex inevitably includes a
horizontally planar section.
Thus, the Examiner has not set forth a factual basis which is sufficient
to support a prima facie case of obviousness of the Appellants’ claimed
4
Appeal 2015-004227
Application 13/421,188
invention. See In re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1017 (CCPA 1967) (“A
rejection based on section 103 clearly must rest on a factual basis, and these
facts must be interpreted without hindsight reconstruction of the invention
from the prior art”). Accordingly, we reverse the rejections.
DECISION/ORDER
The rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 1,3, 5—7, 9, and 10
over Yen in view of Carpenter, claims 4 and 8 over Yen in view of
Carpenter and Rinnovatore and claims 11 and 12 over Kennedy in view of
Yen and Carpenter are reversed.
It is ordered that the Examiner’s decision is reversed.
REVERSED
5