DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Matsui US 2001/0033369.
PNG
media_image1.png
398
764
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Matsui discloses a channel member comprising: a dense ceramic body (1, ¶0065) including an upper surface and a lower surface, wherein the dense ceramic body comprises a first channel (6) inside, wherein a depth of the first channel is greater than a width of the first channel (see Fig. 1, depth is greater than width).
As for claim 4, Matsui discloses wherein the upper surface and the lower surface are parallel to each other, and the first channel is parallel to the upper surface and the lower surface (see Fig. 1).
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 7 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ito et al. US 2015/0122464.
Ito discloses a channel member comprising: a dense ceramic body (4, ¶0044-47) including an upper surface and a lower surface, wherein the dense ceramic body comprises a first channel (7) inside, wherein a depth of the first channel is greater than a width of the first channel (see Fig. 2a, depth is greater than width).
As for claim 2, Ito discloses wherein the depth (Z-direction) of the first channel (7) is at least twice the width of the first channel (see Fig. 2a).
As for claim 4, Ito discloses wherein the upper surface and the lower surface are parallel to each other, and the first channel (7) is parallel to the upper surface and the lower surface (see Fig. 2a).
As for claim 7, Ito discloses a second channel (6) between the first channel (7) and the upper surface, wherein a depth of the second channel (6) along a direction of thickness is greater than a width of the second channel (¶0022).
As for claim 10, Ito discloses wherein the dense ceramic body (4) includes a plurality of suction holes (8, 9) for connecting the first channel (7) and the upper surface to suction a workpiece (2, ¶0023), and the second channel (6) is a channel through which a temperature control fluid flows (¶0021).
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 7-9, 13 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito et al. US 2015/0122464.
Ito discloses, in the alternative, a channel member comprising: a dense ceramic body (4a, 4b) including an upper surface and a lower surface, wherein the dense ceramic body comprises a first channel (6) inside, and further discloses wherein the depth/thickness of the channel can be between 2mm to 8mm and the width can be between 2mm to 8mm (¶0022) but does not specify wherein a depth of the first channel is greater than a width of the first channel. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify the depth of the first channel to be greater than a width of the first channel as an alternative embodiment for providing a cooling path for the main body of Ito.
As for claim 2, the modified Ito teaches wherein the depth (Z-direction) of the first channel (6) is at least twice the width of the first channel (¶0022).
As for claim 4, the modified Ito teaches wherein the upper surface and the lower surface are parallel to each other, and the first channel (6) is parallel to the upper surface and the lower surface (see Fig. 2a).
As for claim 5, the modified Ito teaches wherein the first channel (6) includes a first convex portion (10) connecting an upper surface and a side surface of the first channel (6, Fig. 2b).
As for claim 7, the modified Ito teaches a second channel (7) between the first channel (6) and the upper surface, wherein a depth of the second channel along a direction of the thickness is greater than a width of the second channel (see Fig. 2a).
As for claim 8, the modified Ito teaches wherein the depth of the second channel (7) is at least twice the width of the second channel (see Fig. 2a).
As for claim 9, the modified Ito teaches wherein the first channel (6) is independent of the second channel (7), first channel having a depth and a width, the depth of the second channel is greater than the depth of the first channel (see Fig. 2a).
As for claim 13, Ito discloses a channel member comprising: a dense ceramic body (Ito, 4) including an upper surface and a lower, wherein the dense ceramic body comprises three or more laminated layers (4a, 4b, 5) of ceramic substrates, except for a ceramic substrate on the uppermost layer, each of the ceramic substrates include a channel (6, 7), and for the ceramic substrates including a channel, a ceramic substrate located above is laminated on the ceramic substrate located below, and a depth of the channel (6, 7) of the ceramic substrate located above is greater than a width of the channel of the ceramic substrate located above, and is greater than half of a thickness of the ceramic substrate located above.
Ito does not specify wherein the dense ceramic body has a thickness of 50mm or more between the upper surface and the lower surface and having an area in a plan view equal to or greater than an area of a circle with a diameter of 350mm. However, it would have been obvious to modify the thickness and area of a circle with the claimed 50mm or more and diameter of 350mm as claimed as a mere design consideration through routine engineering. Furthermore, wherein the only difference between the prior at and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device (In Gardnerv. Tec Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984)).
As for claim 20, the modified Ito teaches wherein the dense ceramic body (4) comprises a first ceramic substrate (4a) and a second ceramic substrate (4b), and a ceramic bonding layer (13) between the first ceramic substrate and the second ceramic substrate (¶0044-47).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito et al. US 2015/0122464 in view of Yamaguchi et al. US 2019/0013231.
PNG
media_image2.png
418
422
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
432
430
media_image3.png
Greyscale
As for claim 11, Ito discloses and/or teaches all the limitations as recited above but does not specify wherein the second channel includes a second convex portion connecting an upper surface and a side surface of the second channel. However, Yamaguchi teaches a channel member having a convex portion (55C) connecting an upper surface (55U) and a side surface (55S) in order to influence a turbulent flow within the channel (¶0156). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify the second channel of Ito to include a convex portion as taught by Yamaguchi in order to influence the turbulent flow within the channel to provide uniformity.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-13 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 6 and 12 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.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 TYRONE V HALL JR whose telephone number is (571)270-5948. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 7:30am-3:30pm.
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, Monica Carter can be reached at (571) 272-4475. 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.
/TYRONE V HALL JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights