DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Response to Amendments
This is a non-final office action in response to applicant's arguments and remarks filed on 08/25/2025.
Status of Rejections
All previous rejections are withdrawn in view of the Applicant’s arguments.
New grounds of rejection are presented.
Claims 1, 2, and 4-7 are under consideration for this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 2, and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yahagi (JP H02205696 A, Google Translation used for citations) in view of Yoshioka et al (US 2015/0068890 A1), Wilson et al (US 10227706 B2), and Banik et al (US 2019/0055665 A1).
Claim 1: Yahagi discloses a plating apparatus comprising:
a plating tank see (e.g. #3 on Fig 2) configured to store a plating solution (see e.g. #7 on Fig 2);
an anode being disposed in an inside of the plating tank (see e.g. #5 on Fig 2);
a substrate holder disposed above the anode and configured to hold a substrate (see e.g. #2 on Fig 2) as a cathode (see e.g. abstract);
a rotation mechanism (see e.g. #6 on Fig 2) configured to rotate a holder cover (see e.g. #5 on Fig 2) disposed to the substrate holder;
wherein the holder cover is configured to have a lower surface immersed in the plating solution and positioned below a surface to be plated of the substrate (see e.g. face of #5 facing #4 on Fig 2), and
the lower surface of the holder cover is provided with at least one cover groove extending in a direction intersecting with a rotation direction of the holder cover (see e.g. #10 on Fig 3 and Fig 7).
Yahagi does not explicitly teach the rotation mechanism is configured to rotate the substrate holder when the substrate holder cover rotates. Yoshioka discloses a plating apparatus for electroplating a wafer (see e.g. abstract) comprising a substrate holder (see e.g. #32 on Fig 2) that is rotated to aid in the electrolyte agitation yielding a more uniform film thickness (see e.g. [0013]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the apparatus so that the rotation mechanism also rotates the substrate holder to aid in the electrolyte agitation for more uniform film thickness.
Yahagi does not explicitly teach a turbulence generating member, the turbulence generating member being configured to generate turbulence in the plating solution flowing from below the substrate toward the substrate.
Wilson teaches a plating apparatus (see e.g. abstract) comprising a turbulence generating member (protrusions, see e.g. col 1, lines 41-52; #60 on Fig 5) disposed in a position below the substrate (#30 on Fig 5) and above the anode (#28 on Fig 3) in the inside of the plating tank (see e.g. Fig 3), the turbulence generating member being configured to generate turbulence in the plating solution flowing from below the substrate toward the substrate (“a paddle having ribs spaced farther apart provides better mass transfer by creating larger vortices”, see e.g. col 1, lines 41-52). The design of the turbulence generating member creates “more uniform mass-transfer” (see e.g. abstract; col 1, lines 41-52). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Yahagi by including the turbulence generating member connected to an upper surface of an ionically resistive element taught in Wilson because the turbulence generating member creates vortices that improve the mass transfer of the apparatus.
Yahagi in view of Wilson does not explicitly teach that the turbulence generating member connected to an upper surface of an ionically resistive element, the ionically resistive element comprising a plurality of holes. Bank teaches a plating apparatus (see e.g. abstract) comprising an ionically resistive element (see e.g. #107 on Fig 1) comprising a plurality of holes (see e.g. [0044]) connected to a row of protrusions (see e.g. #115 on Fig 1). The ionically resistive element provides a means of controlling ionic transport during plating (see e.g. [0011]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Yahagi in view of Wilson by connecting the turbulence generating member connected to an upper surface of the ionically resistive element taught in Banik to provide a means of controlling ionic transport during plating.
Claim 2: Yahagi in view of Yoshioka, Wilson, and Banik discloses that the holder cover has a ring shape in a bottom view (see e.g. Fig 1, Fig 3, and Fig 7 of Yahagi).
Claim 7: Yahagi in view of Yoshioka, Wilson, and Banik discloses an agitating method (see e.g. page 2, paragraph starting with “When plating is performed” of Yahagi) of the plating solution of the plating apparatus according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), comprising rotating the substrate holder by the rotation mechanism (see e.g. [0013] of Yoshioka) with the lower surface of the holder cover immersed in the plating solution when the plating process is performed on the substrate (see e.g. page 2, paragraph starting with “When a semiconductor wafer” of Yahagi).
Claim(s) 4- 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yahagi in view of Yoshioka, Wilson, and Banik as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Gleissner at al (US 2023/0193503 A1).
Claim 4: Yahagi in view of Yoshioka, Wilson, and Banik teaches that the turbulence generating member has an internal flow passage configured to communicate a lower end of the turbulence generating member with an upper end of the turbulence generating member, and the plating solution heading toward the substrate flows through the internal flow passage (see e.g. #62 on Fig 5 of Wilson).
Yahagi in view of Yoshioka, Wilson, and Banik does not explicitly teach that the internal flow passage in a bottom view of the turbulence generating member has an Archimedean spiral shape.
Gleissner teaches an apparatus for electrolytic deposition of a rotating substrate (see e.g. abstract) comprising a turbulence generating member (“distribution body”, see e.g. abstract) having an internal flow passage configured to communicate a lower end of the turbulence generating member with an upper end of the turbulence generating member (“openings” communicate a lower end aka a first side with an upper end aka a second side, see e.g. #2 on Fig 2; [0076]), and the plating solution heading toward the substrate flows through the internal flow passage, and the internal flow passage in a bottom view of the turbulence generating member has an Archimedean spiral shape (see e.g. [0045]). Said Archimedean spiral shape results in desirably uniform coatings (see e.g. [0046]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the apparatus of Yahagi in view of Yoshioka, Wilson, and Banik to use the Archimedean spiral shape because this design allows the apparatus to produce desirably uniform coatings on the substrate.
Claim 5: Yahagi in view of Yoshioka, Wilson, Banik, and Gleissner teaches that the internal flow passage is provided with a protrusion configured to generate the turbulence in the plating solution flowing through the internal flow passage (see e.g. abstract; col 1, lines 41-52).
Claim 6: Yahagi in view of Yoshioka, Wilson, Banik, and Gleissner teaches that the turbulence generating member is configured such that when a plating process is performed on the substrate, the upper end of the turbulence generating member has a clearance with the surface to be plated of the substrate and is positioned above the lower surface of the holder cover (turbulence generating member is between the anode and substrate, see e.g. #60 on Fig 1 of Yoshioka, which would give the member a clearance with the surface to be plated of the substrate in and be positioned above the lower surface of the holder cover of Yahagi).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see filed 08/25/2025 with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) under 35 USC 103 over Yahagi in view of Yoshioka and Banik have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made over Yahagi in view of Yoshioka, Wilson, and Banik.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER W KEELING whose telephone number is (571)272-9961. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM - 4:00 PM. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Luan Van can be reached at 571-272-8521. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ALEXANDER W KEELING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1795