`“x
`‘\\f
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMIVHSSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria1 Virginia 22313-1450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`
`
`
`
`14/007,681
`
`09/26/2013
`
`Masahiro Yamamoto
`
`MTS-3683US
`
`5830
`
`“Hg/2016 —RATNERPRESTIA m
`7590
`52473
`2200 RENAISSANCE BLVD
`ABRAHAM, IBRAHIME A
`SUITE 350
`KING OF PRUSSIA, PA 19406
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`1756
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`11/18/2016
`
`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):
`
`pcorrespondence @ratnerprestia.c0m
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Applicant(s)
`Application No.
` 14/007,681 YAMAMOTO, MASAHIRO
`
`
`AIA (First Inventor to File)
`Art Unit
`Examiner
`Office Action Summary
`
`
`IBRAHIME A. ABRAHAM [SENS 1756
`-- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING DATE OF
`THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR1. 136( a).
`after SIX () MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1 .704(b).
`
`In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`
`Status
`
`1)IZI Responsive to communication(s) filed on 10/3/2016.
`El A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2b)|:l This action is non-final.
`2a)|Z| This action is FINAL.
`3)I:I An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)|:| Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)IZI Claim(s) 12 and 17-20 is/are pending in the application.
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`is/are allowed.
`6)I:I Claim(s)
`7)|Z| Claim(s) 12 and 1720 is/are rejected.
`
`8)|:I Claim(s)_ is/are objected to.
`* If any)claims have been determined allowable, you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`
`
`()
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`hit
`:/'/\W¢W.LISI>I‘.0. ovI’ atentS/init events/
`
`
`
`iindex.‘s or send an inquiry to PPI-iieedback{®usgtc.00v.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)I:l The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)I:l The drawing(s) filed on
`is/are: a)I:I accepted or b)I:I objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`12)I:| Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)I:l All
`
`b)|:l Some” c)I:l None of the:
`
`1.I:I Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.|:l Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.|:| Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`3) D Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`1) E Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date.
`.
`.
`4) I:I Other'
`2) I] InformatIon DIsclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL—326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20161102
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/007,681
`
`Page 2
`
`Art Unit: 1756
`
`1.
`
`The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent
`
`provisions.
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Status of the Claims
`
`2.
`
`This is a final office action in response to applicant’s arguments and remarks filed
`
`on 10/3/2016. Claims 12 and 17-20 are pending in the current office action. Claim 12
`
`has been amended. Claims 17-20 are new.
`
`Status of the Rejections
`
`3.
`
`All rejections from the previous office action are withdrawn due to claim
`
`amendments.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`4.
`
`The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis
`
`for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described
`as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to
`be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been
`obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which
`said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the
`invention was made.
`
`5.
`
`The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere 00., 383 U.S. 1, 148
`
`USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining
`
`obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/007,681
`
`Page 3
`
`Art Unit: 1756
`
`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.
`
`6.
`
`This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the
`
`claims under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter
`
`of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein
`
`were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation
`
`under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was
`
`not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to
`
`consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C.
`
`102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
`
`7.
`
`Claims 12 and 17-20 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being
`
`unpatentable over Sakai et al. (PGPub# US 2010/0219064 A1) in view of Hsieh et
`
`al. (US Pat# 5,885,425).
`
`8.
`
`Regarding claims 5, 6, 11, and 12, Sakai teaches a deposition apparatus and
`
`method comprising: a vacuum chamber (par. 40: sputtering unit held within a vacuum
`
`chamber); a holding part 107 which holds a base member 106 in the vacuum chamber;
`
`an evaporation source 101 which has a principal surface inclined with respect to a
`
`principal surface of the base member which is held, and holds a deposition material;
`
`and an angle correcting member 111 which is provided so as to cover an upper space
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/007,681
`
`Page 4
`
`Art Unit: 1756
`
`of the principal surface of the base member, and is provided outside a spatial region
`
`which is encompassed by line segments which connect a periphery of the principal
`
`surface of the evaporation source and a periphery of the principal surface of the base
`
`member, wherein the principal surface of the base member, the principal surface of the
`
`evaporation source and a principal surface facing the base member, of the angle
`
`correcting member, extend to a depth direction in a case of viewing from a front of the
`
`vacuum chamber, when an arbitrary point on the principal surface of the base member
`
`is denoted by a first point and at least a center point on the principal surface of the
`
`evaporation source is denoted by a second point in a case of viewing from the front of
`
`the vacuum chamber, at least a part of the principal surface of the angle correcting
`
`member exists on a line which forms 450 from the first point with respect to a line which
`
`connects the first point and the second point, and another part of the principal surface of
`
`the angle correcting member extends to a side opposite to the evaporation source. (par.
`
`40-69 and figures 1 and 6)
`
`9.
`
`Sakai does not explicitly teach wherein the angle correcting member is movable
`
`with respect to the base member during deposition, and performing deposition while
`
`changing an incident angle distribution of an evaporation particle to the base member
`
`by performing deposition based on a first deposition condition where the angle
`
`correcting member is positioned at a first position and performing deposition based on a
`
`second deposition condition, which is different from the first deposition condition, where
`
`the angle correcting member is moved to a second position which is different from the
`
`first position.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/007,681
`
`Page 5
`
`Art Unit: 1756
`
`10.
`
`However, Hsieh teaches a method of using an angle correcting member during
`
`deposition by sputtering a target. Hsieh teaches that the angle correcting member with
`
`angled vanes is rotated during deposition to control the distribution of the incident angle
`
`of the sputtered particles. Hsieh teaches that rotating the angle correcting member
`
`improves deposition uniformity and allows for improved deposition into high aspect ratio
`
`vias. (abstract, col. 6, line 25-col. 14, line 37 and figures 1-10:Hsieh teaches numerous
`
`collimator/angle correcting member embodiments with angled vanes in which the
`
`collimator can be beneficially rotated.)
`
`a.
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of
`
`the invention to have applied the rotating angle correcting member of Warren, for
`
`the angle correcting member of Sakai, in order to member improve deposition
`
`uniformity and allow for improved deposition into high aspect ratio vias as taught
`
`by Hsieh. The combination of Sakai and Hsieh would read on performing a first
`
`deposition condition at a first incident angle distribution and a second deposition
`
`condition at a second incident angle distribution due to the rotation of the
`
`collimator of Hsieh.
`
`11.
`
`Regarding claim 17, the combination of Sakai and Hsieh teaches wherein in a
`
`case where the angle correcting member is moved to the second position, the angle
`
`correcting member is moved in a direction going away from the evaporation source.
`
`(abstract, col. 6, line 25-col. 14, line 37 and figures 1-10:Hsieh teaches the angle
`
`correcting member is rotated. When combined in the method of Sakai, the rotation
`
`would read on being moved in a direction going away from the evaporation source.)
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/007,681
`
`Page 6
`
`Art Unit: 1756
`
`12.
`
`Regarding claim 18, the combination of Sakai and Hsieh teaches wherein a
`
`deposition time is adjusted at the first position and the second position, respectively.
`
`(col. 6, line 50-col. 7, line 4: Hsieh teaches deposition rate changes depending on angle
`
`of impingement which changes during collimator rotation.)
`
`13.
`
`Regarding claim 19, Sakai teaches wherein the base member is a solid object,
`
`and the deposition is performed on the solid object. (par. 40-69 and figures 1 and 6)
`
`14.
`
`Regarding claim 20, the combination of Sakai and Hsieh wherein the deposition
`
`is performed on different faces of the base member. (abstract, col. 6, line 25-col. 14, line
`
`37 and figures 1-10:Hsieh teaches depositing into high aspect ratio vias with multiple
`
`faces.)
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`15.
`
`Applicant's arguments filed 10/3/2016 have been fully considered but they are
`
`not persuasive.
`
`16.
`
`Applicant’s Argument #1
`
`b.
`
`Applicant argues that newly amended claims are not taught by the cited
`
`prior art.
`
`17.
`
`Examiner's Response #1
`
`c.
`
`Please see new grounds of rejection above. Examiner recommends that
`
`applicant more distinctly claim the structure and movement of the angle
`
`correcting member during deposition.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/007,681
`
`Page 7
`
`Art Unit: 1756
`
`Conclusion
`
`18.
`
`Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in
`
`this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP
`
`§ 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37
`
`CFR1.136(a).
`
`A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE
`
`MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.
`
`In the event a first reply is filed within
`
`TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not
`
`mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the
`
`shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any
`
`extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of
`
`the advisory action.
`
`In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later
`
`than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to IBRAHIME A. ABRAHAM whose telephone number is
`
`(571 )270-5569. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8-4 pm.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
`
`supervisor, Keith D. Hendricks can be reached on (571)272-1401. The fax phone
`
`number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571 -
`
`273-8300.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/007,681
`
`Page 8
`
`Art Unit: 1756
`
`Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the
`
`Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for
`
`published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
`
`Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only.
`
`For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should
`
`you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic
`
`Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a
`
`USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information
`
`system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571 -272-1 000.
`
`/|BRAHIME A ABRAHAM/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1756
`***
`
`