Detailed Notice
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Claims 1-8 in the reply filed on 7/10/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-8 are pending consideration.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pietsch (US 20080014839 A1) in view of Renke (CN 108608314A) and Matsushita (US 20200061774 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Pietsch teaches a double-sided grinding apparatus for producing planarized semiconductor wafers (abstract). Shown below is Fig. 1 and 2 of Pietsch.
PNG
media_image1.png
468
334
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Pietsch teaches (see figs. 1-2, paragraphs [0100]) the polishing device having a lower supporting rod (5) positioned at a center position of a bottom of the device, a first disc (4) attached to the upper end of the lower supporting rod, an upper supporting rod (unnumbered, but seen at the opposite side of the device from rod (5)) positioned above the device, a second disc (1) attached to the lower end of the upper supporting rod, a polishing cloth (11) positioned on a lower end of the second disc, a group of planet gears (13) arranged on an upper end surface of the first disc (4) via an intermediate driving mechanism (7), a polishing cloth (12) disposed between the first disc and the planet gears, a first rotation mechanism (indicated by arrow nu) connected to the intermediate driving mechanism, a second rotation mechanism (indicated by arrow n0) connected to the second disc supporting rod, and the second disc assembly being provided with a polishing liquid injection assembly (including holes 34).
Pietsch fails to teach (1) the polishing device being an electrolyzer comprising a graphite electrode plate arranged on the first disc and a DC power supply or (2) a lifting mechanism attached to the first disc supporting rod and a lifting mechanism attached to the second disc supporting rod.
Regarding (1), Renke teaches an apparatus and method for electrochemical mechanical polishing in order to planarize a component (abstract). Shown below is Fig. 1 of Renke.
PNG
media_image2.png
415
642
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The apparatus of Renke includes structure similar to that taught by Pietsch, including a double-sided polishing device which has an upper disk (1) and a lower disk (16) each having the same structure (Pg. 7, Lines 20-25), wherein upper and lower disks have polishing pads attached as polishing layers (4 and 14, respective of the upper and lower disks), wherein the electrolyte is transported through conduits to the upper and lower polishing pads layers, and the polishing pad layers (4 and 14) are brought in contact with a planar member (5) to be polished. Renke also includes (see fig. 1) a DC power supply (24) which connects via wires (see pg. 5, lines 14-32) to an upper electrode disc (3) and a lower electrode disc (15) to perform electrolytic polishing in addition to mechanical polishing. Renke teaches that each electrode disc layer (3, 15) may be a whole plate of graphite (Pg. 8, lines 33-35). Renke teaches that the combined electrolytic and mechanical polishing action has a higher material removal rate than purely mechanical polishing (Pg. 1, lines 15-21).
Prior to the effective filing date of the present invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device of Pietsch to additionally perform electrolytic etching as suggested by Renke for the purpose of increasing the processing rate of the polishing. In order to complete such modification, one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that the graphite cathode disc and graphite anode disc of Renke would have been incorporated into the upper disc and lower disc, respectively, of Pietsch and to have connected the cathode disc and anode disc to a DC power supply via wires (see MPEP 2143 I D and G).
Regarding (2), Pietsch teaches (see fig. 1 and paragraph [0104]) the existence of a working gap (30) between the upper disc and lower disc. Additionally, the workpieces are held between the upper disc and lower disc. One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that the apparatus of Pietsch inherently included at least one lifting mechanism for providing relative movement between the upper disc and the lower disc to permit placement and removal of substrates held within the working gap.
However, such inherently present lifting mechanism does not necessarily include two lifting mechanisms, one attached to the upper disc and the other to the lower disc.
In the same field of endeavor as Pietsch, Matsushita teaches a mechanism for height setting a polishing pad in a chemical polishing device (abstract). Matsushita teaches (see paragraph [0033]) a lifting platform which drives a lifting mechanism (18) that moves a polishing pad upward or downward in order to set a working gap.
Prior to the effective filing date of the present invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided an upper lifting mechanism and a lower lifting mechanism to both the upper and lowers disks of the device of Pietsch to achieve the opening of the working gap for placement and removal of substrates as suggested by Matsushita (see MPEP 2143 I C).
Regarding Claim 2, Pietsch teaches (see Fig. 1 and 2, and paragraph [0099]) that a collinear rotation axle (5) is connected to the lower disk (4) which drives the rotational speed of the inner drive ring (7) which is positioned at the center of the lower disk. Further, Pietsch teaches an outer drive ring (9), wherein between the outer drive ring and the inner drive ring are placed sun gear carriers (13).
However, Pietsch doesn’t teach that the collinear rotational axle would be connected to the center axis of a graphite plate electrode.
As shown in Claim 1, Renke teaches that each electrode disc layer (3, 15) may be a whole plate of graphite (Pg. 8, lines 33-35).
Prior to the effective filing date of the present invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device of Pietsch with a lower disk having a graphite plate in order to obtain the predictable result of a centrally connected to the collinear rotational axle which drives the gear mechanisms in the polishing device to additionally perform electrolytic etching as suggested by Renke.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pietsch (US 20080014839 A1) in view of Renke (CN 108608314A) and Matsushita (US 20200061774 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Boller (US6299514B1).
Regarding Claim 3, Pietsch in view of Renke in view of Matsushita teaches to claim 1 above. Further, Pietsch teaches (see Fig. 1 and paragraph [0099]) that the upper working disc has a plurality of through holes (34) through which can be fed a liquid during the grinding operation.
However, Pietsch does not teach that liquid injection channels are disposed in a main pipe in the cathode disk supporting rod bearing both an electrolyte supply line and a slurry supply line.
Renke teaches that electrolyte is supplied to the upper and lower disk pads via a conduit (understood to be an electrolyte supply pipe) [Lines 38-40. Pg 4 of translation].
Prior to the effective filing date of the present invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device of Pietsch have incorporated the electrolyte supply lines of Pietsch in order that the double sided electrochemical mechanical polishing apparatus with supplied electrolyte to the working pads.
However, Pietsch does not teach that a group of liquid injection pipers are supplied inside the upper supporting shaft in order to supply slurry and electrolyte solutions.
Boller teaches a chemical mechanical polishing device in the same field of endeavor as Pietsch and Renke.
Boller teaches that a hollow driving shaft (36) comprises axially parallel channels (36 and 46) [Col. 4, Lines 30-55], which are cooling channels (understood to be liquid injection pipes) [Col. 2, Lines 5-33]. Boller teaches that the upper and lower surfaces of a carrier disk have equivalent cooling line structure in the lower drive shaft as in the upper drive shaft, in order to provide coolant to the carrier disk [para. 15-16]. This advantageously enables differential cooling to the upper and lower faces of a work disk, if desired [Col. 2, Lines 34-46].
Prior to the effective filing date of the present invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the base electrochemical mechanical polishing device of modified Pietsch could incorporate the known structure of a vertical liquid supply lines in the drive shafts above and below the work disk, as per Boller, in order to arrive at a electrochemical mechanical polishing device which provides fresh electrolyte supply line and an abrasive slurry supply line to the work disk, wherein the supply lines are incorporated into the drive shaft to provide better thermal regulation of the polishing process.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pietsch (US 20080014839 A1) in view of Renke (CN 108608314A) and Matsushita (US 20200061774 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Lee (KR 101487413 B1).
Regarding Claim 4, Pietsch teaches that the sun gears, shown in Fig. 2 above, have carriers (13) which are understood to be substrate slots [0105].
However, Pietsch does not teach that the sun gears have air guides,
Lee teaches a chemical mechanical polishing device in the same field of endeavor as Pietsch.
Lee teaches that the sun gears is provided with carriers which have through holes (156) in order that abrasive slurry can be provided to the working gap, thereby increasing the efficacy of polishing [Pg. 3, mid-page, paragraphs 7-8].
Prior to the filing of the present invention it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill that the known method of providing through holes in the sun gears, as shown by Lee, could be incorporated into the base device of the modified polishing apparatus of Pietsch in order to arrive at an electrochemical mechanical polishing apparatus which would more easily enable provision of the slurry to the working gap during polishing.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pietsch (US 20080014839 A1) in view of Renke (CN 108608314A) and Matsushita (US 20200061774 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Koeberle (FR 2830538 A1).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Pietsch teaches to Claim 1 above.
However, Pietsch does not teach that an electrolyte discharge pipe with a stop valve is at a side of an electrolyzer.
Koeberle teaches to a substantially similar problem of draining an electrolyte from a reservoir tank.
As shown in Fig. 1 of Koeberle below, electrolyte drains from the reaction cell after the electrolyte jet (7) contacts a substrate (9), whereby the electrolyte pools and drains from a region in the middle position of the container (11) (which is understood to be an equivalent of an electrolyzer here), such that when the stop valve (18) is open, electrolyte is drained from the container and returns to a reservoir (5) [Translation Page 5, bottom three paragraphs].
PNG
media_image3.png
357
429
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Prior to the filing of the present invention it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill that the known method draining electrolyte through the use of a stop valve, as shown by Koeberle, could be incorporated into the base device of the modified polishing apparatus of Pietsch in order to arrive an electrochemical mechanical polishing apparatus that can drain spent electrolyte.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pietsch (US 20080014839 A1) in view of Renke (CN 108608314A) and Matsushita (US 20200061774 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Miller (US 5245796 A).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Pietsch teaches to Claim 1 above.
However, modified Pietsch does not teach the use of an agitator at the bottom of the electrolyzer.
Miller teaches a semiconductor polishing apparatus in the same field of endeavor as Pietsch.
Miller teaches a method for using ultrasonic agitation to polish a semiconductor wafer [Paragraph 7]. Miller teaches that an ultrasonic agitator can be immersed in a slurry in order to dislodge debris from a pad and avoid scratches [Paragraph 10].
Prior to the filing of the present invention it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill that the known method of using an ultrasonic agitator, as per Miller, could be incorporated into the base device of modified Pietsch in order to arrive at an electrochemical mechanical polishing apparatus which agitates the polishing slurry to avoid scratching.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pietsch (US 20080014839 A1) in view of Renke (CN 108608314A) and Matsushita (US 20200061774 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Usui (JP 59047382 A).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Pietsch teaches to Claim 1 above.
However, modified Pietsch does not teach that the supporting rods of the anode and cathode discs are provided with a ceramic coating followed by an anti-acid paint.
Usui teaches to the problem of providing a metallic substrate with a heat and corrosion resistance coating, which is a field concerning the same problem as the instant claim.
Usui teaches that an intermetallic compound layer of FeAl2 and FeAl on a steel surface is protected by the formation of SiO2 and SiO2Cr2O3 and Al2O3 bonded chemically with chromium oxide is formed on the surface of the intermetallic layer. It is understood that SiO2Cr2O3 equates to a ceramic protection layer and chromium oxide serves as an equivalent for an antiacid paint layer.
Prior to the filing of the present invention it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill that the known method of using a dual ceramic and acid-resistant coating, as per Usui, could be incorporated into the base device of modified Pietsch in order to arrive at an electrochemical mechanical polishing apparatus which has supporting rods that are resistant to the corrosive action of the electrolyte which the system uses to polish semiconductor substrates.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pietsch (US 20080014839 A1) in view of Renke (CN 108608314A) and Matsushita (US 20200061774 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Shirakashi (US20050121328A1) and (WO 03-072672).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Pietsch teaches to claim 1 as shown above.
However, modified Pietsch does not teach a cathode lifting mechanism which operates by the use of a cathode guide column which is connected to a guide column and a cathode supporting table, which connect to the cathode supporting disc rod; nor does modified Pietsch teach an anode lifting mechanism which operates by the use of an anode guide column which is connected to an anode guide drive which connects to a base and an anode supporting table, which connect to the anode supporting disc rod.
Shirakashi teaches a chemical mechanical polishing apparatus in the same field of endeavor as Pietsch.
Shirakashi teaches a device shown in Fig. 7 above. The electrolytic processing apparatus has a rotating shaft (15), corresponding to an electrode supporting rod, connected to a pivot arm (43), corresponding to an electrode supporting table, connected to a pivot shaft (44), corresponding to an electrode guide column, connected to a ball screw (46) and vertical movement motor (47), corresponding to an electrode guide drive [Paragraphs 134-136].
Prior to the filing of the present invention it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill that the known method of arranging the rotational drive mechanisms in an electrochemical mechanical polishing apparatus, as per Shirakashi, could be incorporated into the modified device of Pietsch to arrive at an electrochemical mechanical polishing apparatus that provides drive mechanisms for both the cathode and anode faces with equivalent structure, with a reasonable expectation of success.
However, modified Pietsch as further modified by Shirakashi does not teach that the cathode and anode lifting mechanisms are connected to a connection column which is attached to a bottom side of the electrolyzer.
Liu teaches an electrochemical mechanical polishing device. Below is Fig. 1 of Liu.
PNG
media_image4.png
600
586
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Liu teaches that a basin (204), which is an electrolyte reservoir, is supported on a base (206) which connects to the rotational drive systems (236) [paragraphs [0018]-[0019]].
Prior to the filing of the present invention it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill that the known method of situating an electrochemical mechanical polishing apparatus in proximity to and in support of the rotational drive mechanisms, as per Liu, could be applied to the modified drive mechanisms of Shirakashi and incorporated into the modified device of Pietsch in order to arrive at a electrochemical mechanical polishing apparatus which adjoins the cathode and a anode drive mechanisms to a base connected to an bottom part of an electrolyzer reservoir with a reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANAEL J DOWNES whose telephone number is (571)272-1141. The examiner can normally be reached 8am to 5pm.
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, James Lin can be reached at (571) 272-8902. 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.
NATHANAEL JASON. DOWNES
Examiner
Art Unit 1794
/NATHANAEL JASON DOWNES/Examiner, Art Unit 1794 /HARRY D WILKINS III/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794