The present invention relates to gas delivery systems. More particularly, the present invention relates to a configuration independent gas panel apparatus for gas delivery systems.
Conventional semiconductor etch processing systems typically utilize gas sticks. The term “gas sticks” refers, for example, to a series of gas distribution and control components such as a mass flow controller (MFC), one or more pressure transducers and/or regulators, a heater, one or more filters or purifiers, and shutoff valves. The components used in a given gas stick and their particular arrangement can vary depending upon their design and application. In a typical semiconductor processing arrangement, over seventeen gases may be connected to the chamber via gas supply lines, gas distribution components and substrates, and mixing manifolds. These are attached to a base plate forming a complete system known as “gas panel” or “gas box”.
The conventional semiconductor etch processing system depends on the use of several hazardous and non-hazardous processing gases and carefully measured delivery of such gases from the gas source to the processing plasma chamber via the gas supply lines in a synchronized mode. Wafer etching applications are highly sensitive to the delivery time of the required mixture to the chamber. It is necessary to achieve good mixing of very low flow and high flow rate carrier gases and deliver them to the process chamber without significant delays to perform the various applications, such as etching.
In embodiments, the present disclosure provides a gas delivery apparatus for supplying process gas to a processing chamber of a plasma processing apparatus. In embodiments, the gas delivery apparatus includes a mixing manifold having a plurality of gas inlets on a surface thereof, where the gas inlets are equally spaced from a center mixing chamber of the mixing manifold. In embodiments, a plurality of gas supplies is in communication with the plurality of gas inlets on the surface of the mixing manifold. In embodiments, the gas delivery apparatus further includes at least one mixing manifold outlet.
In further embodiments, the present disclosure provides a method of supplying process gas to a processing chamber of a plasma processing apparatus. In embodiments, the method comprises providing a plurality of gas supplies in communication with a plurality of gas inlets on a surface of a mixing manifold having at least one mixing manifold outlet; flowing at least two different gases from the plurality of gas supplies to the mixing manifold to create a first mixed gas; and supplying the first mixed gas to an interior of a plasma processing chamber wherein the mixed gas is energized into a plasma state for processing a semiconductor substrate. In embodiments, the gas inlets are equally spaced from a center mixing point of the mixing manifold, such that a path length for each of the at least two different gases is the same.
In further embodiments, the present disclosure provides a method of configuring a gas delivery apparatus for supplying process gas to a processing chamber of a plasma processing apparatus. In embodiments, the method involves providing a mixing manifold having a plurality of gas inlets on a surface thereof and at least one mixing manifold outlet, the gas inlets being equally spaced from a center mixing point of the mixing manifold; providing a plurality of gas supplies; and arranging the plurality of gas supplies such that they are in communication with the plurality of gas inlets.
Methods and apparatuses for delivering gas to a plasma processing chamber of a plasma processing apparatus are provided herein. In the following description, numerous specific details are set forth in order to provide a thorough understanding of embodiments described herein. It will be apparent, however, to one skilled in the art that embodiments herein may be practiced without some or all of these specific details. In other instances, well known process steps and/or structures have not been described in detail in order to not unnecessarily obscure the methods and apparatuses described herein.
Unless otherwise indicated, all numbers expressing quantities, conditions, and the like in the instant disclosure and claims are to be understood as modified in all instances by the term “about.” The term “about” refers, for example, to numerical values covering a range of plus or minus 10% of the numerical value. The modifier “about” used in combination with a quantity is inclusive of the stated value.
In this specification and the claims that follow, singular forms such as “a”, “an”, and “the” include plural forms unless the content clearly dictates otherwise.
In embodiments, the present disclosure provides a gas delivery apparatus for supplying process gas to a processing chamber of a plasma processing apparatus. The term “gas” is not intended to be limiting and is meant to include any liquid, gas, or combination of liquid and gas. In embodiments, the gas delivery apparatus includes a mixing manifold having a plurality of gas inlets on a surface thereof and at least one mixing manifold outlet, and a plurality of gas supplies are optionally in communication with the plurality of gas inlets on the surface of the mixing manifold. In embodiments, the gas inlets are equally spaced from a central mixing chamber of the mixing manifold.
In previous typical gas panel apparatuses, fluid delivery panels used individual gas sticks with dedicated flow components (including valves, regulators, and so forth) arranged in a linear tubular design—that is to say, a multitude of gases or MFCs were placed along a length of tubing (or mixing manifold). Process gases are mixed downstream of the MFCs to a mixing manifold prior to delivery to the process chamber, such as a plasma reaction chamber. For example, in previous gas panel apparatuses, the mixing manifold was arranged as a long tubular structure and each gas line/MFC was spaced at a certain distance along the length of the tubular structure (so that the length of the manifold depended on the number of gases, and the length of the manifold increases as the number of gases increases). However, in such an arrangement, certain species were inherently located further away from the mixed gas exit (i.e., the gas species were disposed along the length of the mixing manifold, and would flow along the length of the manifold to reach the mixed gas exit, and thus some gas species must necessarily be located closer to the mixed gas exit than others). The arrangement of these manifolds thus results in differences in the amount of time it takes gas to mix and arrive at the reactor chamber, depending in the differences in the relative positions of the gas inlets.
Transient gas flow delays to the process chamber affect etch rates adversely for short process recipes due to non-stabilized or unsteady flows to the chamber. The problem is further exacerbated due to hardware differences in various gas boxes, causing different transport delays to process chambers to create etch matching issues. Gas line position is not consistent from tool to tool, which affects gas delivery performance and creates co-flow and process matching issues. That is to say, when two gas boxes are configured with their gases in different orders, the gas delivery performance will not match, resulting in reduced device yield and degraded binning. Furthermore, a gas box with multiple gas feeds of high and low flow rate gases, spatially separated in a random gas order from various MFCs, may be delivered at different times to the chamber depending on their diffusivity and flow velocities (momentum or inertia).
Gas delay delivery problems may be attributed to the volume through which low flow gases flow to mix with the higher flow carrier gas(es). Delayed delivery of key process etching gases to the reaction chamber impacts wafer etch rates and critical dimensions on semiconductor wafers. In a mixing manifold with an isolated low flow gas, located away from a high flow gas, the low flow gas will take a physical length of time to mix with higher flow gas, which is used to speed up delivery of the gas mixture to the chamber. The time required to fill the low flow gas volume from the MFC until it mixes with the high flow gas, as well as its diffusion through the high flow gas, determines the total transport delay to the reaction chamber.
Furthermore, gas panels are typically manufactured with three or more gas sticks since manufacturing fewer gas sticks is expensive and uses additional parts that may not be necessary to use. Thus, a user has no option other than having a set number of gas sticks. For semiconductor applications, the number of gas sticks is commonly 3, 6, 9, 12, and 16. However, if a user has a nine gas stick gas panel installed and wants to add one or two additional gas sticks, the user would be required to buy a gas pallet having a minimum of at least three gas sticks. It is difficult to efficiently connect a single gas stick to an existing gas panel without removing the entire gas stick, risking contamination, and/or using additional manual effort and time to remove and reinstall the gas delivery components.
Alternatively, should the user have a nine gas stick gas panel installed and later only needs to use seven gas sticks, two gas sticks would not be used on the gas panel. This would result in excess parts of the gas panel that are not used, and removal of the excess gas sticks from the gas panel would not be possible. This situation creates “dead-leg”, a section of conduit or manifold through which gas does not flow. Dead-leg is considered to be a source of contamination.
Each MFC 118a-118n may be in fluid communication with the mixing manifold 126 via gas inlet 142a, 142b, 142c, 142n. The gas inlet may be any type of inlet that may be manually or remotely controlled. For example, the gas inlet may be any known junction that may be manually positioned in an open or closed position. The volume of gas from the MFC 118a-118n to the gas inlet 142a-n may be represented by V1. Once the gas enters the mixing manifold 126, it may flow in the direction of flow path B to a mixing manifold exit 140 near the high flow MFC 118a. The high flow carrier gas causes a high forced convection to drive the low flow gas toward the mixing manifold exit 140 thereby attempting to minimizing delay of the mixing with the low flow gas. The volume of gas from the gas inlet 142c to the mixing manifold exit 140 may be represented by V2.
Once the gas mixture exits the mixing manifold 126, the gas mixture may be flowed and retained in an isolation chamber 144 until it is used in a process chamber. The isolation chamber may be any type of chamber used to isolate the gas prior to being used, such as a dual gas feed, or the like.
The total delay time of a low flow gas to mix with a high flow carrier gas (Total Delay TimeLow Flow Gas) may be calculated as the time it takes for the low flow gas to reach the mixing manifold (Tmm) plus the time it takes the gas to diffuse (Tdiffusion) with the high flow carrier gas, as illustrated in the following equation:
Total Delay TimeLow Flow Gas=Tmm+Tdiffusion
The time for the low flow gas to reach the mixing manifold 126, or the inertial delay of the low flow gas (illustrated as V1), may be calculated as follows:
Tmm=(V/φm)*(Pmm/Pambient)
Where V=volume of the gas; φm is the mass flow rate of the low flow gas; Pmm is the pressure in the mixing manifold; and Pambient is ambient pressure.
The time it takes the low flow gas to diffuse (Tdiffusion) with the high flow carrier gas may be calculated as follows:
TdiffusionαL2/Deffective
That is to say, diffusion delays are proportional to (L2/D), where “L” is the length scale, and D is the diffusion coefficient, which is significant for higher length scales. If a species transported by diffusion only mixes with another species with higher momentum, the transport time of the mixed species increases significantly due to the momentum imparted by convective transport of the second species. It is very difficult to completely eliminate slow transport of species in gas boxes with a tubular/linear arrangement of MFCs due to the prominent use of low flow gases with low velocities, which are primarily transported by diffusion—this necessitates the use of a “pushing gas” for convective transport of species by imparting momentum.
For example,
Wafer etching applications are extremely sensitive to the delivery time of the required mixture to the chamber. It is difficult to deliver the necessary mixture of gases to the chamber and then repeat the same on-wafer results with gas boxes having a linear/tubular arrangement of MFCs. In such embodiments, the relative positioning of MFCs on the gas line is crucial—when gas inlets are arranged linearly along a tubular mixing manifold with one or more downstream outlets, the amount of time necessary for the gas to mix and arrive at the reactor chamber changes depending on the relative positions of the gas inlets. If MFC locations are haphazardly mixed (i.e., if the location of a particular MFC is changed between processes), process mismatch results. That is to say, when two gas boxes are configured with their gases in different orders, their gas delivery performance will not match, resulting in reduced device yield.
Accordingly, in embodiments, the present disclosure provides a gas delivery apparatus with consistent (i.e., equal) length scales (path/flow length) for each gas, including the effect of one gas's flow on another, regardless of the relative position of those gases. Thus, as long as two gas boxes include the same gases, they will provide matching gas delivery performance, even if the positions of the gases are changed between processes. Because gas delivery apparatuses according to the instant disclosure provide consistent results regardless of the relative positioning of the gas supplies, such gas delivery apparatuses provide greater flexibility in terms of the variety of applications they can support.
More particularly, in embodiments, the instant disclosure provides a gas delivery apparatus comprising a multi-inlet mixing manifold, where the gas inlets are spaced equally from a center mixing chamber of the manifold. In such an arrangement, the length scales for all gas species approach zero, or are zero. In embodiments, the gas inlets are spaced such that radial lines drawn from the gas inlets to a center point of the center mixing chamber are the same length. In embodiments, the mixing manifold includes a cylindrical mixing chamber, and the gas inlets are may be located at circumferentially spaced locations on a side face and/or axial end face of the cylinder. Arranging all gases on a cylindrical surface in this way collapses a linear tubular design into a single mixing point—that is to say, by arranging all gases on a cylindrical surface such that the length scale approaches zero (or is zero), high and low flow gases can be mixed instantly, and co-flow effects (i.e., gas mixing delays due to gas position or location) can be eliminated.
Any appropriate diameter may be selected for the mixing manifold—for example, in embodiments, the diameter of the mixing manifold may be selected to correspond to the diameter needed to equally distribute gas inlets corresponding to a required number of gas supplies. In embodiments, the diameter of the gas manifold may be about 0.5 inches, or about 0.75 inches, or about 1 inch, or about 1.25 inches, or about 1.5 inches, or about 1.75 inches, or about 2 inches, or greater than about 2 inches, such as from about 2 to about 8 inches, or from about 3 to about 5 inches.
In embodiments according to the instant disclosure, the flow path/length for each gas is the same. That is to say, in embodiments, the gas inlets on the mixing manifold are spaced such that a path length from any one of the plurality of gas supplies to the center mixing chamber of the mixing manifold is the same when the gas supply is connected to any of the plurality of gas inlets. Thus, the flow path of a particular gas would be the same regardless of which gas inlet the gas supply is connected to. Because the gas supplies can be connected to any of the gas inlets, the gas delivery apparatus provides a simplified layout, reduces component redundancy, and simplifies the control system. The system also is less heavy and improves process variability and flexibility.
In embodiments, a manual valve may be used for carrying out the supply or isolation of a particular gas supply. The manual valve may also have a lockout/tagout device above it. Worker safety regulations often mandate that plasma processing manufacturing equipment include activation prevention capability, such as a lockout/tagout mechanism. A lockout generally refers, for example, to a device that uses positive means such as a lock, either key or combination type, to hold an energy-isolating device in a safe position. A tagout device generally refers, for example, to any prominent warning device, such as a tag and a means of attachment that can be securely fastened to an energy-isolating device in accordance with an established procedure.
A regulator may be used to regulate the gas pressure of the gas supply and a pressure gas may be used to monitor the pressure of the gas supply. In embodiments, the pressure may be preset and need not be regulated. In other embodiments, a pressure transducer having a display to display the pressure may be used. The pressure transducer may be positioned next to the regulator. A filter may be used to remove impurities in the supply gas. A primary shut-off valve may be used to prevent any corrosive supply gases from remaining in the gas stick. The primary shut-off valve may be, for example, a two-port valve having an automatic pneumatically operated valve assembly that causes the valve to become deactivated (closed), which in turn effectively stops plasma gas flow within the gas stick. Once deactivated, a non-corrosive purge gas, such as nitrogen, may be used to purge the gas stick. The purge gas stick may have, for example, three ports to provide for the purge process (i.e., an entrance port, an exit port, and a discharge port).
A mass flow controller (MFC) may be located adjacent the purge valve. The MFC accurately measures the flow rate of the supply gas. Positioning the purge valve next to the MFC allows a user to purge any corrosive supply gases in the MFC. A mixing valve next to the MFC may be used to control the amount of supply gas to be mixed with other supply cases on the gas panel.
In embodiments, a discrete MFC may independently control each gas supply. Exemplary gas stick and gas panel arrangements, and methods and apparatuses for gas delivery (and controlling time scale of gas delivery), are described, for example, in U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0326554, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0005601, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0255781, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0255782, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0255883, U.S. Pat. No. 7,234,222, U.S. Pat. No. 8,340,827, and U.S. Pat. No. 8,521,461, each of which are commonly assigned, and the entire disclosures of which are hereby incorporated by reference herein in their entireties.
In other embodiments, a single (master) MFC may be used to initiate the desired flow set point for individual fluid ranges and then release the individual fluids for immediate mixing in the mixing manifold. Individual flow measurement and control may be performed from a single MFC printed circuit board (PCB)—in such embodiments, each pressure transducer will prompt the proper positioning of an individual piezoelectric valve. In this way, a single MFC controller can operate multiple fluids. Individual fluid ranges may be set individually, and then released simultaneously for mixing, thus allowing for full MFC capability with common purge. A single system can thus deliver any steps/processes or mixtures, increasing process variability and flexibility.
In embodiments, MFCs may be controlled by a remote server or controller. Each MFCs may be a wide range MFC having the ability to control either a high flow MFC or a low flow MFC. The controller may be configured to control and change the flow rate of a gas in each of the MFCs.
As discussed above, in embodiments, the mixing manifold may include a cylindrical mixing chamber (i.e., in embodiments, the mixing manifold may be a cylinder). In embodiments, particularly embodiments using a large number of MFCs, the gas delivery system may comprise multiple cylindrical surfaces, such as two cylindrical surfaces, or more than two cylindrical surfaces. That is to say, in embodiments, the mixing manifold may be in fluid communication with a second mixing manifold. For example,
In embodiments, the manifold includes a cylindrical mixing chamber, and the MFCs and/or gas supplies are mounted on a side face and/or axial end face thereof. By mounting the MFCs on a side face and/or axial end face of the manifold including a cylindrical mixing chamber, the length scales for each species approach zero (i.e., are zero, or are nearly zero). Gas transport time for each species is thus the same, eliminating the mixing delay problem. In other embodiments, the radial distance from MFC to the mixing manifold may be made of equal length for each gas species to ensure the same gas transport time.
In embodiments, the gas manifold has gas inlets corresponding to each gas supply. In other embodiments, the gas manifold has more gas inlets than gas supplies—because there are additional gas inlets available and because the relative positioning of each gas does not impact gas delivery times, adding another gas to such a gas box can be accomplished without disruption of the existing gases. A gas line may also be removed without disrupting the other gases in the apparatus. This provides greater flexibility in terms of the variety of applications the apparatuses can support. Moreover, in embodiments, even though the manifold may include more gas inlets than gas supplies (i.e., even though there may be some unused gas inlets), the manifold according to the instant disclosure does not include any dead legs (a section of conduit or manifold through which gas does not flow). “Dead legs” are considered to be a source of contamination, as the resulting gas stagnation with long residence times allows chemical reactions and possible metal contamination. Because the gas delivery apparatus according to the instant disclosure does not have any “dead leg” regions in the mixing manifold, the gas delivery apparatus thus avoids these negative results.
In embodiments, the first mixing hub 710 and/or the second mixing hub 720 may include at least one gas outlet 730, which can deliver mixed gases from the mixing chamber of the mixing manifold to a gas delivery line. In other embodiments, a mixing hub 710 or 720 may include a closed surface or blocked outlet 750 which does not have a gas outlet therein.
As shown in
In embodiments, the gas supplies are connected to the center mixing chamber via gas inlets 860. In embodiments, the gas inlets 860 may comprise channels in the first mixing hub 810 and/or the second mixing hub 820. As shown in
In embodiments, the center mixing chamber 840 has a diameter of about 0.5 inch, but other sizes may be used—for example, in embodiments, the spherically shaped hub has a diameter of about 0.25 inch, or about 0.3 inch, or about 0.4 inch, or about 0.6 inch, or about 0.8 inch, or about 1 inch, or about 1.5 inches, or about 2 inches. After mixing in the center mixing chamber 840, mixed gases may be connected to a gas delivery line, such as via a gas outlet 830. Gas outlet 830 is shown in a side of the mixing hub 810; however, the gas outlet may be positioned anywhere that does not interfere with the gas inlets 860. For example, a mixing hub may contain a closed surface or blocked outlet 850, and the gas outlet may be positioned on a different portion of the mixing manifold.
The present disclosure further provides, in embodiments, a method of configuring a gas delivery apparatus for supplying process gas to a processing chamber of a plasma processing apparatus. Such a method may include, for example, providing a mixing manifold having a plurality of gas inlets on a surface thereof and at least one mixing manifold outlet. The gas inlets are equally spaced from a center mixing chamber of the mixing manifold, such that the length scale of each gas species is the same and when gas is flowed from gas supplies to the mixing manifold, the gas delivery time for each gas is the same. In embodiments, the method further comprises providing a plurality of gas supplies, and arranging the plurality of gas supplies such that they are in communication with the plurality of gas inlets (i.e., such that gas can flow from the gas supplies to the mixing manifold through the gas inlets).
In embodiments, the present disclosure provides a method of supplying process gas to a processing chamber of a plasma processing apparatus. Such a method may include, for example, providing a plurality of gas supplies in communication with a plurality of gas inlets on a surface of a mixing manifold having at least one mixing manifold outlet; flowing at least two different gases from the plurality of gas supplies to the mixing manifold to create a first mixed gas; and supplying the first mixed gas to a plasma processing chamber coupled downstream of the mixing manifold. The gas inlets are equally spaced from a center mixing chamber of the mixing manifold, such that a path length for each of the at least two different gases is the same, thus allowing for instant mixing of gases (whether high or low flow) and eliminating co-flow effects.
In embodiments, a single mass flow controller initiates a flow set point for each of the at least two different gases and releases them simultaneously for immediate mixing. In other embodiments, a discrete mass flow controller initiates the flow set point for each individual gas, and the discrete mass flow controllers release the gases (simultaneously) for immediate mixing.
In use, gas enters the mixing manifold via a plurality of gas inlets on the mixing manifold. The path length/travel time for each gas is the same—thus, the gases reach a center mixing point of the mixing manifold at the same time and mix. The gas mixture may then exit the mixing manifold via a mixing manifold exit. Mixing manifolds having a plurality of manifold exits are described, for example, in commonly assigned U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0005601, the entire disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.
In embodiments, after exiting the mixing manifold, the first mixed gas may be delivered directly to a processing chamber. In other embodiments, the first mixed gas may be added to another array of gases or mixed gases.
In embodiments, if sufficient gas inlets are available, gas supplies can be added or removed from the apparatus without disrupting the remaining gas supplies. Thus, in use, a method may additionally comprise connecting at least one additional gas supply to a gas inlet on the surface of the mixing manifold, flowing gas from the plurality of gas supplies and the at least one additional gas supply to the mixing manifold to create a second mixed gas, and supplying the second mixed gas to the plasma processing chamber and/or mixing the second mixed gas with another fluid array before supplying to the mixing chamber.
In other embodiments, the supply of gas from at least one of the plurality of gas supplies may be terminated after the first mixed gas is supplied to the processing chamber. In embodiments, the supply of gas may be terminated by detaching the gas supply from the mixing manifold, or shutting of the gas supply. In embodiments, at least three different gases may be flowed from the plurality of gas supplies to the mixing manifold to create the first mixed gas, and the process may further comprise terminating the supply of gas from at least one of the plurality of gas supplies after the first mixed gas is supplied to the processing chamber, flowing gas from the remaining gas supplies of the plurality of gas supplies to the mixing manifold to create a second mixed gas, and supplying the second mixed gas to the processing chamber. Removing the gas supply from the mixing manifold does not create a dead leg within the mixing manifold.
In further embodiments, at least one gas supply may be disconnected, and at least one additional gas supply may be connected to the mixing manifold to create a second mixed gas without disrupting the other gas lines. That is to say, according to the instant disclosure, gas lines may be added, moved, or removed without impacting gas delivery times.
It will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that the present invention can be embodied in other specific forms without departing from the spirit or essential characteristics thereof. The presently disclosed embodiments are therefore considered in all respects to be illustrative and not restricted. The scope of the invention is indicated by the appended claims rather than the foregoing description and all changes that come within the meaning and range and equivalence thereof are intended to be embraced therein.
This application claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(e) to U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/976,255, filed Apr. 7, 2014, the entire content of which is incorporated herein by reference thereto.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2361150 | Petroe | Oct 1944 | A |
2569857 | Jaegle et al. | Oct 1951 | A |
3026183 | Cole, III | Mar 1962 | A |
3102004 | Grintz | Aug 1963 | A |
3865133 | Alford | Feb 1975 | A |
4099919 | Leidal | Jul 1978 | A |
4134002 | Stanford | Jan 1979 | A |
4215081 | Brooks | Jul 1980 | A |
4264212 | Tookey | Apr 1981 | A |
4422471 | Faccini | Dec 1983 | A |
4545328 | Fujiyama et al. | Oct 1985 | A |
4581521 | Grise | Apr 1986 | A |
4703718 | Enstrom | Nov 1987 | A |
4714091 | Wagner | Dec 1987 | A |
5063027 | Schneider | Nov 1991 | A |
5082633 | Stuper | Jan 1992 | A |
5534328 | Ashmead et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5794645 | Rohrberg et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5836355 | Markulec et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5887977 | Morikawa | Mar 1999 | A |
5911342 | Sindoni | Jun 1999 | A |
5950874 | Sindoni | Sep 1999 | A |
5984519 | Onodera et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6068016 | Manofsky, Jr. et al. | May 2000 | A |
6073646 | Kimura | Jun 2000 | A |
6125887 | Pinto | Oct 2000 | A |
6159442 | Thumm et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6168948 | Anderson et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6186177 | Maher | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6260581 | Hollingshead | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6269978 | Sindoni | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6283143 | Adachi, Jr. et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6283155 | Vu | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6302141 | Markulec et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6352594 | Cook et al. | Mar 2002 | B2 |
6440504 | Akiyama | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6546960 | Rohrberg et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6581640 | Barron | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6640835 | Rohrberg et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6648020 | Fujimoto et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6655829 | Vanden Bussche et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6718817 | Ko et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6753200 | Craighead et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6880745 | Stueber et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6907904 | Harris et al. | Jun 2005 | B2 |
7055550 | Harris et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7126094 | Bower et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7140558 | McCracken et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7150475 | Eriksson et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7178556 | Reid, II et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7195037 | Eidsmore | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7225835 | Vu | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7234222 | Hao et al. | Jun 2007 | B1 |
7261812 | Karp et al. | Aug 2007 | B1 |
7299825 | Milbum | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7307247 | Bower et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7320339 | Milbum | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7334605 | Vu | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7404417 | Eidsmore | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7410519 | Ewald | Aug 2008 | B1 |
7789107 | Eriksson et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7798388 | Crockett et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7806143 | Taskar | Oct 2010 | B2 |
7892357 | Srivastava | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7976795 | Zhou et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
8122910 | Taskar | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8196480 | Mayeaux | Jun 2012 | B1 |
8196609 | Oya et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8322380 | Taskar | Dec 2012 | B2 |
8340827 | Yun et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
8521461 | Shareef et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8746284 | DeDontney | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8794267 | Shareef et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8846183 | Unger et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8851113 | Taskar et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8852685 | Kenworthy et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
9879795 | Burkhart et al. | Jan 2018 | B2 |
10022689 | Shareef et al. | Jul 2018 | B2 |
20020017329 | Fukushima | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020072164 | Umotyo et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020176317 | Bellasalma et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030124842 | Hytros et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20040091406 | Wolfert et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040092118 | Johnson et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040125689 | Ehrfeld et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040189311 | Glezer et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040231586 | Dugue et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20050005981 | Eidsmore et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050104242 | Olaru | May 2005 | A1 |
20050284529 | Iwabuchi | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060028908 | Suriadi et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20070007204 | Schanz et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070138203 | Sacchet | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070140042 | Schanz et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070253281 | Radford et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070291581 | Ehrfeld et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080066859 | Kobayashi et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080106968 | Schanz et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20090071556 | Bourlart et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090120364 | Suarez et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20100067323 | Blom et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20110005601 | Shareef | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110158931 | Wittek | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20120175442 | Xiong et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120237696 | Huseinovic et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120263012 | Xiong et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20130025718 | Nagase et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130248511 | Wallinger | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130255782 | Shareef et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130255883 | Shareef et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20140020779 | Vu | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140076236 | Sankarakrishnan et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140090599 | Saitou | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140137961 | Kao et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140182689 | Shareef et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140202577 | Webster, III | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140241960 | Mochizuki | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20150362080 | Vu | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20160111257 | Kellogg et al. | Apr 2016 | A1 |
20170021317 | Shareef et al. | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170173886 | Menchik et al. | Jun 2017 | A1 |
20170203511 | Burkhart et al. | Jul 2017 | A1 |
20170204989 | Burkhart et al. | Jul 2017 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2003-334479 | Nov 2003 | JP |
2004-214591 | Jul 2004 | JP |
10-2009-0125681 | Dec 2009 | KR |
WO 2014199158 | Dec 2014 | WO |
WO 2016061493 | Apr 2016 | WO |
Entry |
---|
U.S. Notice of Allowance dated Mar. 22, 2018 issued in U.S. Appl. No. 14/809,041. |
U.S. Office Action, dated Jun. 22, 2017, issued in U.S. Appl. No. 14/517,192. |
U.S. Final Office Action, dated Nov. 16, 2017, issued in U.S. Appl. No. 14/517,192. |
U.S. Office Action, dated Dec. 30, 2016, issued in U.S. Appl. No. 14/997,419. |
U.S. Final Office Action, dated Jul. 10, 2017, issued in U.S. Appl. No. 14/997,419. |
U.S. Notice of Allowance, dated Sep. 27, 2017, issued in U.S. Appl. No. 14/997,419. |
U.S. Notice of Allowance (Corrected), dated Jan. 3, 2018, issued in U.S. Appl. No. 14/997,419. |
U.S. Office Action, dated Dec. 15, 2017, issued in U.S. Appl. No. 15/087,889. |
U.S. Office Action dated Jun. 5, 2017, issued in U.S. Appl. No. 14/809,041. |
U.S. Notice of Allowance dated Nov. 30, 2017, issued in U.S. Appl. No. 14/809,041. |
PCT International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Dec. 28, 2015 issued in PCT/US2015/0555997. |
PCT International Preliminary Report on Patentability and Written Opinion dated Apr. 27, 2017 issued in PCT/US2015/0555997. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20150287573 A1 | Oct 2015 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61976255 | Apr 2014 | US |