Ex Parte MERRY et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jun 7, 2018

14179749 (P.T.A.B. Jun. 7, 2018)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
14/179,749 02/13/2014
150369 7590 06/11/2018
Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt/AMAT
1211 SW Fifth Ave.
Suite 1900
Portland, OR 97204
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Walter R. MERRY
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
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
017173/USA/ETCH/DRIE/MDD 6664
EXAMINER
DUCLAIR, STEPHANIE P.
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
1713
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
06/11/2018 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):
IPDocketing@SCHWABE.com
mscardina@schwabe.com
ghoover@schwabe.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte WALTER R. MERRY, SERGIO FUKUDA SHOJI,
YANG YANG, DUY D. NGUYEN, and JUSTIN PHI
Appeal2017-008493
Application 14/179,749
Technology Center 1700
Before CATHERINE Q. TIMM, JAMES C. HOUSEL, and LILAN REN,
Administrative Patent Judges.
REN, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appeal2017-008493
Application 14/179,749
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants 1 appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from a rejection2 of
claims 1-11and21-29. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We affirm.
CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER
The claims are directed to "methods of controlling process parameters
during processing of a workpiece with a plasma processing chamber." Spec.
i-f 2. 3 Claim 1, reproduced below, is illustrative of the claimed subject
matter:
1. A computer-implemented method for adaptively
controlling a process parameter for a plasma processmg
chamber, the method comprising:
controlling the process parameter, at least in part, with a
feedforward control signal, wherein the feedforward control
signal is based at least in part on a controlled temperature input
signal received from one or more showerhead sensors;
determining the process parameter to be in a steady state
condition with a value that deviates from a setpoint of the process
parameter; and
in response to determining that the value of the process
parameter is in the steady state condition and that the value of the
process parameter deviates from the setpoint, modifying a gain
coefficient to provide a modified gain coefficient of the
feedforward control signal based on a model function relating a
change in the gain coefficient with a change in the value of the
1 The real party in interest is identified as Applied Materials, Inc. (Appeal
Brief of December 5, 2016 ("App. Br."), 3.)
2 Final Office Action of July 6, 2016 ("Final Act."). In this opinion, we also
refer to the Examiner's Answer of March 21, 2017 ("Ans.") and the Reply
Brief of May 19, 2017 ("Reply Br.").
3 Application 14/179, 7 49, Automated Algorithm for Tuning of F eedforward
Control Parameters in Plasma Processing System, filed February 13, 2014.
We refer to the '"749 Specification," which we cite as "Spec."
2
Appeal2017-008493
Application 14/179,749
process parameter, the modified gain coefficient different from
the gain coefficient.
App. Br. 11 (Claims Appendix).
REFERENCES
The prior art references relied upon by the Examiner in rejecting the
claims on appeal are:
Mahadeswaraswamy
Martin
US 2011/0186545 Al
us 5,933,345
REJECTIONS
Aug. 4, 2011
Aug. 3, 1999
Claims 1-11 and 21-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Mahadeswaraswamy and Martin. Final Act. 2.
OPINION
The dispositive issue on appeal is whether the Examiner reversibly
erred in finding that Mahadeswaraswamy teaches or suggests a method for
which a "feedforward control signal is based at least in part on a controlled
temperature input signal received from one or more showerhead sensors" as
recited in claim 1. 4 See App. Br. 7 ("Appellants do not understand
Mahadeswaraswamy as disclosing a process where a temperature controller
receives a controlled temperature input signal from one or more showerhead
sensors, as is taught and claimed ... . ");see also Reply Br. 2 ("Appellants
do not understand Mahadeswaraswamy as disclosing a process where a
temperature controller receives a controlled temperature input signal from
one or more shower head sensors, as is taught and claimed .... ") (emphasis
removed).
4 Appellant does not present separate arguments for claims 2-11, 21, and 22.
App. Br. 6-7. Consistent with the provisions of 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(l)(iv)
(2013), these claims stand or fall with claim 1.
3
Appeal2017-008493
Application 14/179,749
In rejecting claim 1, the Examiner finds that Mahadeswaraswamy
describes the feedforward control signal is based at least in part on a
controlled temperature input signal received from a showerhead or a chuck.
Final Act. 3 (citing Mahadeswaraswamy i-fi-136-37); see
Mahadeswaraswamy i136 (describing "methods and systems
incorporate[ing] a feedforward control algorithm to advantageously reduce
steady state errors and improve response times" which includes "a
temperature control system 100"). The prior art system "provide[s] a
temperature control effort via a feedforward control line that produces a
feedforward control signal .... " Mahadeswaraswamy i127 (cited in Final
Act 2.). Mahadeswaraswamy states that "the system component to be
temperature controlled by the control system 100 is neither limited to a
chuck nor must the temperature controlled component directly couple a
plasma power into the process chamber" and may also include the control of
"a showerhead through which a process gas is input into the plasma process
chamber[.]" Mahadeswaraswamy i136 (cited in Final Act. 3).
To prevail in an appeal to this Board, Appellant must adequately
explain or identify reversible error in the Examiner's§ 103(a) rejections.
See 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(l) (iv) (2013); see also In re Jung, 637 F.3d 1356,
13 65 (Fed. Cir. 2011 ). In this case, Appellants do not address the
Examiner's finding with regard to the teaching that "an alternative
embodiment" of Mahadeswaraswamy may include temperature control via
"a showerhead through which a process gas is input into the plasma process
chamber." Compare Final Act. 13 (citing Mahadeswaraswamy i136) with
App. Br. 6-7 (only mentioning Mahadeswaraswamy i137); compare Ans. 3-
4 (citing Mahadeswaraswamy i136) with Reply Br. 1-2 (only mentioning
4
Appeal2017-008493
Application 14/179,749
Mahadeswaraswamy i-f 37). Appellants' argument does not identify
reversible error in the Examiner's findings based on the prior art teaching as
a whole. See In re Jung, 637 F.3d at 1365 ("[I]t has long been the Board's
practice to require an applicant to identify the alleged error in the examiner's
rejections .... ").
Appellants' argument for claim 21 mirrors that for claim 1. Compare
App. Br. 7 ("Appellants do not understand Mahadeswaraswamy as
disclosing a process where a temperature controller receives a controlled
temperature input signal from one or more showerhead sensors, as is taught
and claimed by Appellants in claims 1-11, 21 and 22.") with App. Br. 8-9
("Appellants do not understand Mahadeswaraswamy as disclosing a process
where a temperature controller receives a controlled temperature input signal
from one or more showerhead sensors, as is taught and claimed by
Appellants in claims 23-29."). Based on the analysis for claim 1 supra, no
reversible error has been identified for claim 23 and its dependent claims. 5
DECISION
The Examiner's rejection of claims 1-11 and 21-29 is sustained.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). See 37 C.F.R.
§ 1.136(a)(l )(iv).
AFFIRMED
5 Appellant does not present separate arguments for claims 24--29. App. Br.
7-8. Consistent with the provisions of 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(l)(iv) (2013),
these claims stand or fall with claim 23.
5