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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.
Response to Argument
3. Applicant's arguments received 12/30/2025 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection. Claims 1-6 and 12-15 are rejected as new prior art references (US 9690202 B2 to Terashita et al. and US 20190172742 A1 to MOCHIZUKI) have been found to teach, in combination with other cited prior art references, the invention recited in these claims. Detailed response is given in sections 4-5 as set forth below in this Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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 of this title, 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.
5. Claims 1-6, 12-15 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terashita et al. (US 9690202 B2) in view of McCHESNEY et al. (US 20170263478 A1) and MOCHIZUKI (US 20190172742 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Terashita discloses an information acquisition system (col. 15, lines 47-67) for acquiring information about a substrate processing apparatus (Fig. 1) which includes a spin chuck (12) configured to hold and rotate a substrate (W), a nozzle (3) configured to supply a processing liquid to a surface of the substrate which is rotating (col. 4, lines 50-58), and a cup (2 in Figs. 1 and 2) surrounding the substrate held by the spin chuck (col. 4, line 59-67; col. 5, lines 1-2).
Terashita does not mention explicitly: the information acquisition system comprising: an inspection wafer held by the spin chuck and including an imaging part configured to image the cup and acquire image data; and an acquisition part configured to acquire information about a height of the cup based on the image data.
McCHESNEY discloses an information acquisition system for acquiring information about a substrate processing apparatus (Abstract; Fig. 26) comprising: a substrate holder (1725) configured to hold a substrate (1750); a cup (e.g., edge coupling ring 1740) surrounding the substrate (para. 0005, 0110); an information acquisition body (1760/1800) configured to image the cup and acquire image data (para. 0111), wherein the information acquisition body includes an acquisition part configured to acquire information about a height of the cup based on the image data (para. 0113, 0115, 0121-0123).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Terashita’s information acquisition body to arrive the claimed invention by incorporating McCHESNEY’s teaching of the acquisition part for acquiring image data of the cup from which information about a height of the cup can be obtained. Doing so would, for example, allow Terashita’s control unit (elevation mechanism 21) to control the operational conditions of the cup (2) as desired (Terashita, col. 4, lines 59-67; McCHESNEY, para. 0005).
The combination of Terashita and McCHESNEY does not mention: an inspection wafer held by the spin chuck and including an imaging part configured to image the cup and acquire image data.
MOCHIZUKI discloses a substrate processing apparatus (Fig. 1), comprising: a substrate holder (spin chuck 21 in Figs. 3A and 3B) configured to hold and rotate a substrate (para. 0021); and an inspection wafer (para. 0029: “the inspection wafer 100 includes a base wafer 101 and a plurality of (e.g., three) cameras 102”) held by the substrate holder (Figs. 3A and 3B) and including an imaging part (Fig. 3A) configured to image and acquire image data (para. 0029, 0034: “ … the cameras 102 transmit identification information (e.g., camera IDs) and the images of the stage 21 to the external control unit 50”; see also para. 0035, 0041: “the cameras 102 image a part of the stage 21 which includes the outer periphery of the stage 21 … based on the images obtained by the cameras 102”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Terashita/McCHESNEY to arrive the claimed invention by incorporating MOCHIZUKI’s inspection wafer and adapting it to image the cup’s edge position, e.g. vertical height, so that the operational conditions of the cup can be monitored and controlled accurately (Terashita, col. 4, lines 59-67; McCHESNEY, para. 0005). It is deemed that such a modification is merely an intended use of the MOCHIZUKI inspection wafer, and the skilled person in that art would conceive and apply said modification without needing inventive skill but depending on practical considerations and according to the dictates of the circumstances. It has been held that the mere application of a known technique to a specific instance by those skilled in the art would have been obvious.
Regarding claim 2, Terashita discloses: wherein the cup (2) includes a side wall and an annular protrusion body (23) formed to protrude from the side wall toward a center of the cup (Fig. 1).
Terashita does not mention explicitly: wherein the imaging part is further configured to image an inner peripheral end of the annular protrusion body, and wherein information about a height of the annular protrusion body is acquired as the information about the height of the cup.
Th teaching of McCHESNEY includes: wherein an imaging part (1760 in Fig. 26) is further configured to image an inner peripheral end of an annular protrusion body that is extended from a side wall of the cup (edge coupling ring 1740), and wherein information about a height of the annular protrusion body is acquired as the information about the height of the cup (para. 0113, 0115, 0121-0123).
In view of McCHESNEY, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Terashita/McCHESNEY to apply the cameras of MOCHIZUKI’s inspection wafer to image the inner peripheral end of the annular protrusion body in Terashita and acquire the information about a height of the annular protrusion body. It is deemed that such a modification is merely an intended use of the MOCHIZUKI inspection wafer, and the skilled person in that art would conceive and practice it without needing inventive skill but depending on practical considerations and according to the dictates of the circumstances. As such, the combination of Terashita/McCHESNEY/MOCHIZUKI discussed for claim 1 above renders the invention of claim 2 obvious.
Regarding claim 3, Terashita does not but McCHESNEY teaches: a first storage part configured to store conversion information for the cup for converting a number of pixels between a preset reference height in the image data acquired by the information acquisition body held by the spin chuck and the inner peripheral end of the annular protrusion body into a distance (para. 0115: “ … (e.g. number of pixels) to produce images of a suitable size to enable determination of the condition and position of the edge coupling ring 1740, and to provide direct measurement of ring height and ring erosion”; by inherency, there must be a storage part configured to store the conversion information so that a measurement of ring height can be obtained from the number of pixels in the image data; also, there must be “a preset reference height in the image data” based on which the degree/level of ring erosion can be measured; see also para. 0121-0123, 0127), wherein the acquisition part is further configured to acquire information about the height of the annular protrusion body based on the conversion information for the cup (para. 0115). As such, the combination of Terashita/McCHESNEY/MOCHIZUKI renders obvious the invention of claim 3.
Regarding claim 4, Terashita discloses: wherein the annular protrusion body (23 in Fig. 1) includes an intermediate annular body that protrudes from a height below an upper end of the side wall (see annotated Fig. 3 below). The rest of the claimed limitations are rendered obvious by the combination of Terashita/McCHESNEY and MOCHIZUKI as discussed for claim 3 above.
PNG
media_image1.png
875
1002
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Terashita does not but McCHESNEY discloses: wherein the imaging part (1760 or 1770 in Fig. 26) is provided on the information acquisition body such that the inner peripheral end of the annular protrusion body(1740) at a position set to be imaged by the imaging part is positioned at a height center portion of the image acquired by the imaging part (para. 0111: “The attachment mechanism 1765 may be a bracket, docking mechanism, or other suitable attachment mechanism enabling suitable vertical and/or horizontal movement of the camera 1760 relative to the side view port 1770, and enable appropriate focus of the camera 1760 on the appropriate portion of edge coupling ring 1740”); wherein the imaging part is provided such that a height of the imaging part in the information acquisition body is adjustable (para. 0111). As such, the combination of Terashita/McCHESNEY and MOCHIZUKI discussed for claim 2 above renders obvious the invention recited in claims 5 and 6.
Regarding claims 12 and 13, Terashita discloses an arithmetic device, and a method for practicing the device, for acquiring information (col. 15, lines 47-67) about a substrate processing apparatus (Fig. 1) which includes a spin chuck (12) configured to hold and rotate a substrate (W), a nozzle (3) configured to supply a processing liquid to a surface of the substrate which is rotating (col. 4, lines 50-58), and a cup (2 in Figs. 1 and 2) surrounding the substrate held by the spin chuck (col. 4, line 59-67; col. 5, lines 1-2).
Terashita does not mention explicitly: the device comprising: a storage part configured to store image data acquired by an imaging part included in an inspection wafer held by the spin chuck in order to image the cup; and an acquisition part configured to acquire information about a height of the cup based on the image data.
McCHESNEY discloses an information acquisition system for acquiring information about a substrate processing apparatus (Abstract; Fig. 26) comprising: a substrate holder (1725) configured to hold a substrate (1750); a cup (e.g., edge coupling ring 1740) surrounding the substrate (para. 0005, 0110); an information acquisition body (1760/1800) configured to image the cup and acquire image data (para. 0111), wherein the information acquisition body includes an acquisition part configured to acquire information about a height of the cup based on the image data (para. 0113, 0115, 0121-0123); and a storage part configured to store image data acquired by an imaging part (para. 0115); and an acquisition part configured to acquire information about a height of the cup based on the image data (para. 0113, 0115, 0121-0123).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Terashita’s information acquisition body to arrive the claimed invention by incorporating McCHESNEY’s teaching of the acquisition part for acquiring image data of the cup from which information about a height of the cup can be obtained. Doing so would, for example, allow Terashita’s control unit (elevation mechanism 21) to control the operational conditions of the cup (2) as desired (Terashita, col. 4, lines 59-67; McCHESNEY, para. 0005).
The combination of Terashita and McCHESNEY is silent on: the imaging part is included in an inspection wafer held by the spin chuck in order to image the cup.
MOCHIZUKI discloses a substrate processing apparatus (Fig. 1), comprising: a substrate holder (spin chuck 21 in Figs. 3A and 3B) configured to hold and rotate a substrate (para. 0021); and an inspection wafer (para. 0029: “the inspection wafer 100 includes a base wafer 101 and a plurality of (e.g., three) cameras 102”) held by the substrate holder (Figs. 3A and 3B) and including an imaging part (Fig. 3A) configured to image and acquire image data (para. 0029, 0034: “ … the cameras 102 transmit identification information (e.g., camera IDs) and the images of the stage 21 to the external control unit 50”; see also para. 0035, 0041: “the cameras 102 image a part of the stage 21 which includes the outer periphery of the stage 21 … based on the images obtained by the cameras 102”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Terashita/McCHESNEY to arrive the claimed invention by incorporating MOCHIZUKI’s inspection wafer and adapting it to image the cup’s edge position, e.g. vertical height, so that the operational conditions of the cup can be monitored and controlled accurately (Terashita, col. 4, lines 59-67; McCHESNEY, para. 0005). It is deemed that such a modification is merely an intended use of the MOCHIZUKI inspection wafer, and the skilled person in that art would conceive and apply said modification without needing inventive skill but depending on practical considerations and according to the dictates of the circumstances. It has been held that the mere application of a known technique to a specific instance by those skilled in the art would have been obvious.
Regarding claims 14 and 15, the combination of Terashita/McCHESNEY and MOCHIZUKI discussed for claims 12 and 13 above renders obvious the invention recited in claims 14 and 15 (see discussion for claims 2 and 3 above).
Regarding claims 17-19, Terashita does not but MOCHIZUKI teaches: wherein a through hole (103 in Fig. 3B) is formed in the inspection wafer (100) below the imaging part (102), and wherein the imaging part is further configured to image a lower side () of the inspection wafer through the through hole (para. 0029: “Each camera 102 is configured to image a lower side of the base wafer 101 through an opening 103 formed in the base wafer 101”). As such, the combination of Terashita/McCHESNEY and MOCHIZUKI discussed for claim 1, 12 or 13 above renders obvious the invention recited in claims 17-19.
Allowable Subject Matter
6. Claims 7 and 16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Reason for Allowance
7. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The primary reason for the allowance of claim 7 is the inclusion of the limitations:
wherein the cup includes a lower member provided below the substrate held by the spin chuck and a protrusion provided on the lower member to protrude upward, wherein the imaging part is further configured to image a top surface of the protrusion, and wherein the acquisition part is further configured to acquire a first distance between the substrate and the protrusion as the information about the height of the cup. It is this limitation found in the claim in combination with the rest of the limitations as claimed in independent claim 1, that has not been found, taught or suggested by the prior art of record, which makes instant claim 7 distinguish over the prior art of record.
The primary reason for the allowance of claim 16 is the inclusion of the limitations: wherein the cup includes a lower member provided below the substrate held by the spin chuck and a protrusion provided on the lower member to protrude upward, wherein the acquiring the image data includes imaging a top surface of the protrusion, and wherein the acquiring the information about the height of the cup includes acquiring a first distance between the substrate and the protrusion. It is this limitation found in the claim in combination with the rest of the limitations as claimed in independent claim 1, that has not been found, taught or suggested by the prior art of record, which makes instant claim 16 distinguish over the prior art of record.
Contact Information
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XIUQIN SUN whose telephone number is (571)272-2280. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am-6:00pm.
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, Shelby A. Turner can be reached on (571) 272-6334. 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.
/X.S/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/SHELBY A TURNER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857