Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Detailed Action
Remarks
This office action is merely to correct typo in the previous office action, and to clarify examiner’s position. No new ground is introduced.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 and 22 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Turner (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2020/0336130) of record, in view of Shibata (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2007/0194863) of record, in view of Roy (WO 2019036214) of record.
Regarding Claim 1
FIG. 5 of Turner discloses a method of transferring a superficial layer to a carrier substrate (520) containing cavities (540), the method comprising: providing a donor substrate (508); providing the carrier substrate, the carrier substrate being comprised of a single material and having a first sid
Turner is silent with respect to “after providing the carrier substrate containing the cavities, producing a plurality of temporary pillars in a least one of the cavities, the plurality of temporary pillars forming partitions, the temporary pillars of plurality having upper surfaces that are coplanar with the first sid
FIG. 6 of Shibata discloses a similar method, comprising producing a plurality of temporary pillar (222) in a least one of the cavities (120,122, FIG. 5) after providing the carrier substrate (10) containing the cavities [0037], wherein the temporary pillars of plurality having upper surfaces that are coplanar with the first side of the carrier substrate of the carrier substrate; the temporary pillars join at least one peripheral wall of the cavity; and removing the plurality of temporary pillars (FIG. 13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the method of Turner, as taught by Shibata. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Turner in the above manner for purpose of providing support to prevent deformation (common knowledge in the art: thinning a film on a groove using a support is a common approach to provide mechanical stability to prevent deformation during processing; temporary support structures are engineered systems used during construction, retrofit, or demolition to maintain structural integrity and prevent deformation until the permanent structure is complete or the work is finished; also see [0007] of Shibata).
Turner as modified by Shibata is silent with respect to “thinning the donor substrate to form the superficial layer comprises supporting the superficial layer with the plurality of temporary pillar during thinning” and the temporary pillars “joining at least one peripheral wall of the cavity”.
FIG. 1 of Roy discloses a similar method, comprising after providing the carrier substrate (100) containing the cavities (110), producing a plurality of temporary pillar (130) in a least one of the cavities, wherein the plurality of temporary pillars forming partitions (separating the cavity formed by 100, excluding the middle protrusions 102, which are interpreted as permanent supporting pillars); thinning the layer (142) to form the superficial layer supported (inherently) with the at least one temporary pillar during thinning [0052]; and removing the plurality of temporary pillars, wherein the temporary pillars join at least one peripheral wall of the cavity.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the method of Turner, as taught by Roy. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Turner in the above manner for purpose of improving processing ([0004] of Roy).
Furthermore, the configuration “joining at least one peripheral wall of the cavity” is a matter of choice, which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant. In re Dailey 149 USPQ 47, 50 (CCPA 1966). See also Glue Co. v. Upton 97 US 3,24 (USSC 1878). MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding Claim 22
FIG. 5 of Turner discloses the single material of the substrate is silicon [0047].
Claims 1-4, 6, 16 and 18-24 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benaissa (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2019/0202688) of record, in view of Kishimoto (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2017/0264266) of record, in view of Shibata, in view of Cai (CN 105743459) of record.
Regarding Claim 1
FIG. 1 of Benaissa discloses a method of transferring a superficial layer to a carrier substrate (2) containing cavities (200), the method comprising: providing a donor substrate (3); providing the carrier substrate, the carrier substrate being comprised of a single material and having a first sid
Benaissa is silent with respect to “after providing the carrier substrate containing the cavities, producing a plurality of temporary pillars in a least one of the cavities, the plurality of temporary pillars forming partitions, the temporary pillars of plurality having upper surfaces that are coplanar with the first sid
FIG. 3 of Kishimoto discloses a similar method, comprising producing a sacrificial supporter (11) in a least one of the cavities; the temporary pillars of plurality having upper surfaces that are coplanar with the first sid
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the method of Benaissa, as taught by Kishimoto. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Benaissa in the above manner for purpose of preventing deformation or damaging during thinning (common knowledge in the art: thinning a film on a groove using a support is a common approach to provide mechanical stability to prevent deformation during processing; temporary support structures are engineered systems used during construction, retrofit, or demolition to maintain structural integrity and prevent deformation until the permanent structure is complete or the work is finished).
Benaissa as modified by Kishimoto is silent with respect to “after providing the carrier substrate containing the cavities, producing a plurality of temporary pillars in a least one of the cavities, the plurality of temporary pillars forming partitions”.
FIG. 13 of Shibata discloses a similar method, comprising producing a plurality of temporary pillar (124) in a least one of the cavities, wherein the plurality of temporary pillars forming partitions (separating the cavity), the temporary pillars of plurality having upper surfaces that are coplanar with the first side of the carrier substrate of the carrier substrate (10); and removing the plurality of temporary pillars (FIG. 14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the method of Benaissa, as taught by Shibata. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Benaissa in the above manner for purpose of providing support to prevent deformation (common knowledge in the art: thinning a film on a groove using a support is a common approach to provide mechanical stability to prevent deformation during processing; temporary support structures are engineered systems used during construction, retrofit, or demolition to maintain structural integrity and prevent deformation until the permanent structure is complete or the work is finished; also see [0007] of Shibata).
Furthermore, the recitation “the plurality of temporary pillars forming partitions” is a matter of choice, which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant. In re Dailey 149 USPQ 47, 50 (CCPA 1966). See also Glue Co. v. Upton 97 US 3,24 (USSC 1878). MPEP 2144.04.
Benaissa as modified by Kishimoto and Shibata is silent with respect to “after providing the carrier substrate containing the cavities, producing a plurality of temporary pillars in a least one of the cavities”.
FIG. 7 of Cai discloses a similar method, comprising after providing the carrier substrate (701) containing the cavities (702), producing a plurality of temporary pillars (705) in a least one of the cavities, wherein the sacrificial supporter remains during thinning (polishing).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the method of Benaissa, as taught by Cai. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Benaissa in the above manner for purpose of improving CMP process ([0002] of Cai).
Regarding Claim 2
FIG. 1 of Benaissa discloses implanting light species in the donor substrate to form a buried fragile region that lies between a first portion of the donor substrate, which portion is intended to form the superficial layer, and a second portion of the donor substrate, which portion is intended to form remainder of the donor substrate; and thinning the donor substrate comprises separating, via the buried fragile region, the superficial layer from the remainder of the donor substrate [0048].
Regarding Claim 3
FIG. 1 of Benaissa discloses the first portion of the donor substrate has a thickness between 0.2 micron and 2 microns [0099].
Regarding Claim 4
FIG. 4 of Kishimoto discloses at least one mechanical grinding operation and/or at least one chemical-mechanical polishing operation and/or at least one chemical etching operation carried out on a back side thereof [0058].
Regarding Claim 6
FIG. 14 of Shibata discloses the upper surfaces of the temporary pillars of the plurality have circular, square, rectangular or cruciform outlines.
Regarding Claim 16
FIG. 4 of Kishimoto discloses removing the plurality of temporary pillars comprises locally etching a second sid
Regarding Claim 18
FIG. 1 of Benaissa discloses the donor substrate comprises at least one semiconductor or piezoelectric material [0090].
Regarding Claim 19
FIG. 3 of Kishimoto discloses the at least one temporary pillar stiffens the superficial layer against a front side the carrier substrate.
Regarding Claim 20
FIG. 4 of Kishimoto discloses supporting the superficial layer with the at least one temporary pillar during thinning comprises directly supporting the superficial layer with the at least one temporary pillar and the carrier substrate.
Regarding Claim 21
FIG. 15 of Shibata discloses some of the partitions form an array of parallel partitions that join the peripheral walls of the cavity.
Regarding Claim 22
FIG. 7 of Cai discloses the single material of the substrate is silicon.
Regarding Claim 23
FIG. 13 of Shibata discloses each of the temporary pillars has a cross-sectional area that is smaller than a cross-sectional area each cavity.
Regarding Claim 24
FIG. 4 of Kishimoto discloses removing the plurality of temporary pillars further comprises completely removing the plurality of temporary pillars.
Claims 1 and 24 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benaissa (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2019/0202688) of record, in view of Chou (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2017/0267516) of record, in view of Cai.
Regarding Claim 1
FIG. 1 of Benaissa discloses a method of transferring a superficial layer to a carrier substrate (2) containing cavities (200), the method comprising: providing a donor substrate (3); providing the carrier substrate, the carrier substrate being comprised of a single material and having a first sid
Benaissa is silent with respect to “after providing the carrier substrate containing the cavities, producing a plurality of temporary pillars in a least one of the cavities, the plurality of temporary pillars forming partitions, the temporary pillars of plurality having upper surfaces that are coplanar with the first sid
FIG. 4 of Chou discloses a similar method, comprising producing a sacrificial supporter (116) in a least one of the cavities; the plurality of temporary pillars forming partitions, the temporary pillars of plurality having upper surfaces that are coplanar with the first sid
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the method of Benaissa, as taught by Chou. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Benaissa in the above manner for purpose of improving the structure strength and increasing yield ([0053] of Chou).
Furthermore, the recitation “the plurality of temporary pillars forming partitions” is a matter of choice, which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant. In re Dailey 149 USPQ 47, 50 (CCPA 1966). See also Glue Co. v. Upton 97 US 3,24 (USSC 1878). MPEP 2144.04.
Benaissa as modified by Chou is silent with respect to “after providing the carrier substrate containing the cavities, producing a plurality of temporary pillars in a least one of the cavities” and the plurality of temporary pillars “joining at least one peripheral wall of the cavity”.
FIG. 7 of Cai discloses a similar method, comprising after providing the carrier substrate (701) containing the cavities (702), producing a plurality of temporary pillars (705) in a least one of the cavities, wherein the sacrificial supporter remains during thinning (polishing).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the method of Benaissa, as taught by Cai. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Benaissa in the above manner for purpose of improving CMP process ([0002] of Cai).
Regarding Claim 24
FIG. 14 of Chou discloses removing the plurality of temporary pillars (116) further comprises completely removing the plurality of temporary pillars.
Claims 8-11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benaissa, Kishimoto, Cai and Shibata, in view of Kim (KR 100306718) of record.
Regarding Claim 8
Benaissa as modified by Kishimoto, Cai and Shibata discloses Claim 1
Benaissa as modified by Kishimoto, Cai and Shibata is silent with respect to “the upper surfaces of the temporary pillars of the plurality form a grid that joins the peripheral walls of the cavity”.
FIG. 3 of Kim discloses a similar method, comprising producing a plurality of temporary pillar (25) in a least one of the cavities, wherein the upper surfaces of the temporary pillars of the plurality form a grid that joins the peripheral walls of the cavity.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the method of Benaissa, as taught by Kim. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Benaissa in the above manner for purpose of improving manufacturing processes (Abstract of Kim).
Regarding Claim 9
FIG. 2 of Kim discloses the temporary pillars of the plurality comprises a plurality of temporary pillars form an array of parallel walls that join at their ends the peripheral walls of the cavity.
Regarding Claim 10
FIG. 1 of Benaissa discloses the joining comprises direct bonding, on the one hand, the donor substrate, and, on the other hand, the first side of the carrier substrate and the upper surfaces of the temporary pillars of the plurality.
Regarding Claim 11
FIG. 4 of Kishimoto discloses removing the plurality of temporary pillars comprises locally etching the superficial layer to form at least one through-aperture in the superficial layer, and chemically etching the at plurality of temporary pillars via the at least one through-aperture.
Claims 12-15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benaissa, Kishimoto, Cai, Kim and Shibata, in view of Boris (WO 2014197995) of record.
Regarding Claim 12
Benaissa as modified by Kishimoto, Cai, Kim and Shibata discloses Claim 11.
Benaissa as modified by Kishimoto, Cai, Kim and Shibata is silent with respect to “the at least one through-aperture is formed plumb with at least one temporary pillar of the plurality”.
FIG. 1 of Boris discloses a similar method, the at least one through-aperture (117) is formed plumb with the at least one temporary pillar (110).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the method of Benaissa, as taught by Boris. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Benaissa in the above manner for purpose of fabricating an apertured microneedle (Para. 5 of Boris).
Regarding Claim 13
FIG. 4 of Kishimoto discloses the at least one through-aperture has a cross-sectional area smaller than an area of an upper surface of the at least one temporary pillar of the plurality.
Regarding Claim 14
FIG. 1 of Boris discloses the at least one through-aperture has a cross-sectional area larger than an area of an upper surface of the at least one temporary pillar of the plurality.
Regarding Claim 15
FIG. 1 of Boris discloses the at least one through-aperture is formed in the superficial layer, outside of regions overhanging the at least one cavity.
Claim 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benaissa, Kishimoto, Cai and Shibata, in view of Lee (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2020/0091888) of record.
Regarding Claim 17
Benaissa as modified by Kishimoto, Cai and Shibata discloses Claim 1
Benaissa as modified by Kishimoto, Cai and Shibata is silent with respect to “the plurality of temporary pillars comprises at least one material chosen from among silicon oxide, silicon nitride, single-crystal silicon, polysilicon, amorphous silicon and porous silicon”.
FIG. 17 of Lee discloses a similar method, wherein the plurality of temporary pillars comprises at least one material chosen from among silicon oxide, silicon nitride, single-crystal silicon, polysilicon, amorphous silicon and porous silicon [0047].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the method of Benaissa, as taught by Lee. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Benaissa in the above manner for purpose of etching selectivity ([0047] of Lee).
Pertinent Art
CN 106959106 discloses removing portion of the donor substrate with support of at least one pillar during thinning. CN 112701079 discloses producing at least one temporary pillar in at least one of the cavities of the carrier substrate. U.S. Patent Pub. No. 20200028482, and 20080024041 discloses at least one supporter pillar having an upper surface that is coplanar with the first side of the carrier substrate and joining at least one peripheral wall of the cavity. JP 2010131900 discloses thinning the donor substrate. Pertinent art also includes US 20220029604, 20180191322 and 20090127978
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Claim 1 have been considered but they are not persuasive. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). The Examiner respectfully submits that Shibata is used to modify Turner to disclose producing a plurality of temporary pillar (222) in a least one of the cavities (120,122, FIG. 5) after providing the carrier substrate (10) containing the cavities [0037], wherein the temporary pillars of plurality having upper surfaces that are coplanar with the first side of the carrier substrate of the carrier substrate; the temporary pillars join at least one peripheral wall of the cavity; and removing the plurality of temporary pillars. FIG. 13 of Shibata is used to modify Turner to disclose producing a plurality of temporary pillar (124) in a least one of the cavities, wherein the plurality of temporary pillars forming partitions (separating the cavity), the temporary pillars of plurality having upper surfaces that are coplanar with the first side of the carrier substrate of the carrier substrate (10); and removing the plurality of temporary pillars (FIG. 14). One of ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Turner/Benaissa as taught by Shibata for purpose of providing support to prevent deformation (common knowledge in the art: thinning a film on a groove using a support is a common approach to provide mechanical stability to prevent deformation during processing; temporary support structures are engineered systems used during construction, retrofit, or demolition to maintain structural integrity and prevent deformation until the permanent structure is complete or the work is finished; also see [0007] of Shibata). MPEP § 2144.04 explains that: The rationale for combining or modifying prior art does not have to be explicitly stated in the references. It can be reasoned from common knowledge in the art, scientific principles, art-recognized equivalents, or legal precedent. Applicant’s arguments with respect to Roy are not persuasive. FIG. 1 of Roy is used to modify Turner/Benaissa to disclose after providing the carrier substrate (100) containing the cavities (110), producing a plurality of temporary pillar (130) in a least one of the cavities, wherein the plurality of temporary pillars forming partitions (separating the cavity formed by 100, excluding the middle protrusions 102, which are interpreted as permanent supporting pillars); thinning the layer (142) to form the superficial layer (inherently) supported with the at least one temporary pillar during thinning; and removing the plurality of temporary pillars, wherein the temporary pillars join at least one peripheral wall of the cavity. Kishimoto is used to modify Turner/Benaissa to disclose producing a sacrificial supporter (11) in a least one of the cavities; the temporary pillars of plurality having upper surfaces that are coplanar with the first sidIn re Kahn, 441 F.3d 977, 987, 78 USPQ2d 1329, 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (moti-vation question arises in the context of the general problem confronting the inventor rather than the spe-cific problem solved by the invention); Cross Med. Prods., Inc. v. Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc., 424 F.3d 1293, 1323, 76 USPQ2d 1662, 1685 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (“One of ordinary skill in the art need not see the identical problem addressed in a prior art refer-ence to be motivated to apply its teachings.”); In re Linter, 458 F.2d 1013, 173 USPQ 560 (CCPA 1972) (discussed below); In re Dillon, 919 F.2d 688, 16 USPQ2d 1897 (Fed. Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 904 (1991). See MPEP § 2144 (IV). FIG. 7 of Cai is used to modify Turner/Benaissa to disclose after providing the carrier substrate containing the cavities (702), producing a plurality of temporary pillars (705) in a least one of the cavities, wherein the sacrificial supporter remains during thinning (polishing). Chou is used to modify Turner/Benaissa to disclose producing a sacrificial supporter (116) in a least one of the cavities; the plurality of temporary pillars forming partitions; thinning the donor substrate (122, FIG. 10) to form the superficial layer comprises supporting the superficial layer with sacrificial supporter during thinning; and removing the sacrificial supporter.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHENG-BAI ZHU whose telephone number is (571)270-3904. The examiner can normally be reached on 11am – 7pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chad Dicke can be reached on (571)270-7996. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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 571-272-1000.
/SHENG-BAI ZHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights