DETAILED ACTION
The communication dated 11/06/2025 has been entered and fully considered.
Claims 1, 3-9 are currently pending. Claim 1 is amended.
Claim 2 was previously cancelled. Claim 9 is new.
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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/06/2025 have been fully 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).
Regarding the Iwata reference, Iwata is not relied upon for what it is performing nor the treatment liquid within the system. The purpose of Iwata is to show that a return pipe can branch in the cleaning machine. It would have been obvious to one skilled in to have a return piping within a treatment chamber as it is one variation in which excess fluid can return to the reservoir.
Regarding the argument that the reservoir stores the produced wafer cleaning liquid, the reference Yoshida is called upon as Yoshida teaches that the chemical liquid that gets sprayed by the nozzle is the same chemical liquid that gets returned to the tank. No additional lines merge with the chemical liquid supply pipe. Additionally, Yoshida also shows a return pipe that can branch in the cleaning machine.
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 4 states “a a water level detector”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 9 states “the return pipe branches from the wafer cleaning water supply pipe at a branch point, and the branch point is connected to the ejection portion without branching or merged in the cleaning machine.” It is unclear how the return pipe branches at a branch point without branching. Also, the phrase “without branching or merged” is unclear. For the purpose of examination, Examiner is interpreting that the phrase is supposed to read as “without branching or merging.” Additionally, the Examiner is determining that the return pipe does not branch or merge with other lines within the cleaning machine.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1 and 3-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morita et al. U.S. Publication 2020/0152488 (henceforth referred to as Morita) in view of Yoshida U.S. Publication 2009/0229641 (henceforth referred to as Yoshida) and Takaki et al. U.S. Publication 2015/0107622 (henceforth referred to as Takaki).
As to Claim 1, (Currently Amended) Morita teaches a wafer cleaning water supply device comprising:
a wafer cleaning water production unit (FIG. 1 paragraph [0026] production unit 2);
a reservoir that stores the produced wafer cleaning water (FIG. 1 paragraph [0026] storage tank 4);
a wafer cleaning water supply pipe (FIG. 1 paragraph [0034] branching piping 7) that connects a reservoir and a water cleaning water ejection portion (FIG. 1 paragraph [0034] piping 10 reads on the claimed water ejection portion) provided in a cleaning machine to supply the wafer cleaning water to the cleaning machine; and
a return pipe (FIG. 1 paragraph [0034] return piping 11) that branches from the wafer cleaning water supply pipe and returns the wafer cleaning water which is excessive in the cleaning machine to the reservoir (FIG. 1 paragraph [0034] return piping 11 connects to storage tank 4),
wherein the wafer cleaning water can be circulated through the reservoir (paragraph [0034] return piping 11 is connected to storage tank 4 and storage tank 4 supplies cleaning water), the wafer cleaning water supply pipe (paragraph [0034] cleaning water travels through branching piping 7), and the return pipe (paragraph [0034] travels through return piping 11).
Morita differs from the instant claim in failing to teach that the return pipe branches in the cleaning machine; wherein when the cleaning machine is in operation, the wafer cleaning water is configured to be ejected from the ejection portion toward a wafer, or part of the wafer cleaning water is configured to be ejected from the ejection portion toward the wafer while the remaining wafer cleaning water that is not ejected from the ejection portion is configured to be returned to the reservoir through the return pipe as the wafer cleaning water which is excessive, and wherein when the cleaning machine is not in operation, the wafer cleaning water is configured to be returned to the reservoir through the return pipe as the wafer cleaning water which is excessive.
Yoshida teaches a similar wafer cleaning system (FIG. 1 paragraph [0027] substrate treatment apparatus 1). Yoshida teaches the return pipe branches in the cleaning machine (FIG. 1 return pipe 21 is located in treatment unit 2).
Therefore, 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 wafer cleaning water supply device as taught by Morita with a return piping within a treatment chamber as taught by Yoshida. Circulating the chemical agent from the reservoir can regulate the temperature of the treatment liquid (paragraph [0034]). By placing the return pipe as close as possible to the wafer cleaning water ejection portion, it would ensure that the water being ejected will have a stabilized temperature.
Takaki teaches a similar wafer cleaning system (FIG. 1 paragraph [0011] substrate liquid processing apparatus). Takaki teaches:
wherein when the cleaning machine is in operation, the wafer cleaning water is configured to be ejected from the ejection portion toward a wafer (FIG. 1 paragraph [0026] a distal end of each first branch line 112 is connected to a first nozzle 304 in order to supply processing liquid to the upper surface of the substrate W), or part of the wafer cleaning water is configured to be ejected from the ejection portion toward the wafer while the remaining wafer cleaning water that is not ejected from the ejection portion is configured to be returned to the reservoir through the return pipe as the wafer cleaning water which is excessive (FIG. 1 paragraph [0042] the remaining processing liquid which does not go to the liquid processing unit 300 passes through the first circulation path 104 and then returns to the first tank 102), and
wherein when the cleaning machine is not in operation, the wafer cleaning water is configured to be returned to the reservoir through the return pipe as the wafer cleaning water which is excessive (FIG. 1 paragraph [0025] first circulation path 104 forms a path in which processing liquid is ejected from the first tank 102 and returns to the first tank 102).
Therefore, 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 wafer cleaning water supply device as taught by Morita with a way to return the processing liquid depending on the operating state of the cleaning machine as taught by Takaki. It would be obvious that processing liquid that is not ejected to the nozzle would return to the reservoir. Additionally, it is known in the art that if a cleaning machine is not in operation, a return pipe would still function in order to prevent the liquid from being stagnant in a pipe and to constantly mix liquids within the pipes and reservoir.
Examiner regards the operation of the claimed wafer cleaning water supply device as intended use of the apparatus’ structure. The wafer cleaning water production unit would be capable of handling water in which a predetermined amount of chemical agent is dissolved (paragraph [0034]). Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does. An apparatus claim may be unobvious even if it operates in the same way as the prior art, as long as there are structural differences. Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc. 15 USPQ 2d 1525 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Morita does not teach that the return pipe branches at a point of 6m or less from the wafer cleaning water ejection portion of the cleaning machine. However, absent the demonstration of any new or unobvious results, the claimed sizes/ proportions are considered by Examiner to be prima facie obvious as a change in size/ proportion. The applicant’s claimed distance of 6m or less would have been obvious, as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that such a distance would not have changed the functionality of the return pipe in Morita. It is old and well known to change sizes/proportions, with no change in their respective functions, as a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious. See MPEP § 2144.04, IV, A. Changes in Size/Proportion.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to determine an optimal distance of the return pipe from the wafer cleaning water ejection portion through routine experimentation, and that the claimed distance would have been found obvious through such routine experimentation. Additionally, having a distance that is minimized would reduce the amount of pipe material and water usage that is needed to operate the equipment.
As to Claim 3, (Previously Presented) Morita further teaches:
the wafer cleaning water production unit comprises a chemical agent tank which stores the chemical agent that is a liquid (FIG. 3 paragraph [0037] chemical solution tank 15), and
the wafer cleaning water production unit has at least one configuration of (1) or (2):
(1) the water cleaning water production unit further comprises a liquid supply pump (FIG. 3 paragraph [0037] chemical injection pump 16) to transport and add the chemical agent to the ultrapure water (paragraph [0037] chemical solution is injected into water line 1 by chemical injection pump 16);
(2) the chemical agent tank is a closed tank and the water cleaning water production unit further comprises a pressure-feeding unit that supplies inert gas (FIG. 5 paragraph [0038] inert gas is supplied to chemical solution tank 15) to the closed tank such that the chemical agent is pushed out from the chemical agent tank and added to the ultrapure water (paragraph [0038] gas pressure is applied to chemical solution tank 15 in order to inject chemical solution into water line 1).
As to Claim 4, (Previously Presented) Morita further teaches the reservoir comprises a a water level detector (FIG. 1 paragraph [0027] water level sensor 4a) which detects a water level of the wafer cleaning water in the reservoir (paragraph [0027] water level sensor 4a detects the water level in storage tank 4), and the wafer cleaning water supply device further comprises a controller (FIG. 1 paragraph [0027] controller 2a) to control start/stop of production of the wafer cleaning water in the wafer cleaning water production unit (paragraph [0012] production of cleaning water production unit can be suspended) based on liquid level information obtained by the water level detector.
As to Claim 5, (Previously Presented) Morita further teaches the reservoir comprises a water level detector (FIG. 1 paragraph [0027] water level sensor 4a) which detects a water level of the wafer cleaning water in the reservoir (paragraph [0027] water level sensor 4a detects the water level in storage tank 4), and the wafer cleaning water supply device further comprises a controller (FIG. 1 paragraph [0027] controller 2a) to control a production amount of the wafer cleaning water in the wafer cleaning water production unit to a production level among a predetermined multiple production levels, based on liquid level information obtained by the water level detector (paragraph [0013] production flow rate increases or decreases dependent on the water level in the storage tank 4).
As to Claim 6, (Previously Presented) Morita further teaches a discharge port (FIG. 1 paragraph [0026] piping 3) provided between the wafer cleaning water production unit and the reservoir.
As to Claim 7, (Previously Presented) Morita further teaches the discharge port (FIG. 1 paragraph [0026] piping 3) is connected to a discharge path (FIG. 1 paragraph [0026] drain piping 6) that communicates with a supply source for the ultrapure water (FIG. 3 drain piping 3 is in communication with water line 1), and the discharge path is provided with an ion exchange device and/or a catalyst device (FIG. 2 paragraph [0050] removal unit 13 can be ion exchange device or a platinum group catalyst) capable of removing a chemical agent component in the wafer cleaning water.
As to Claim 8, (Previously Presented) Morita further teaches the production unit comprises a dissolved-oxygen-removal unit (FIG. 7 paragraph [0040] deaeration device 20) which removes dissolved oxygen from the ultrapure water (FIG. 8 paragraph [0041] deaeration device 20 can be installed on water line 1) or the wafer cleaning water (FIG. 7 paragraph [0040] deaeration device 20 can be installed on piping 3).
As to Claim 9, (New) Yoshida further teaches the return pipe branches from the wafer cleaning water supply pipe at a branch point (FIG. 1 the return pipe branches from a branch point), and the branch point is connected to the ejection portion without branching or merged in the cleaning machine (FIG. 1 the return pipe 21 does not branch or merge with other lines in the cleaning machine).
Claims 1, 3-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morita et al. U.S. Publication 2020/0152488 (henceforth referred to as Morita) in view of Iwata et al. U.S. Publication 2014/0045339 (henceforth referred to as Iwata) and Takaki et al. U.S. Publication 2015/0107622 (henceforth referred to as Takaki).
As to Claim 1, (Currently Amended) Morita teaches a wafer cleaning water supply device comprising:
a wafer cleaning water production unit (FIG. 1 paragraph [0026] production unit 2);
a reservoir that stores the produced wafer cleaning water (FIG. 1 paragraph [0026] storage tank 4);
a wafer cleaning water supply pipe (FIG. 1 paragraph [0034] branching piping 7) that connects a reservoir and a water cleaning water ejection portion (FIG. 1 paragraph [0034] piping 10 reads on the claimed water ejection portion) provided in a cleaning machine to supply the wafer cleaning water to the cleaning machine; and
a return pipe (FIG. 1 paragraph [0034] return piping 11) that branches from the wafer cleaning water supply pipe and returns the wafer cleaning water which is excessive in the cleaning machine to the reservoir (FIG. 1 paragraph [0034] return piping 11 connects to storage tank 4),
wherein the wafer cleaning water can be circulated through the reservoir (paragraph [0034] return piping 11 is connected to storage tank 4 and storage tank 4 supplies cleaning water), the wafer cleaning water supply pipe (paragraph [0034] cleaning water travels through branching piping 7), and the return pipe (paragraph [0034] travels through return piping 11).
Morita differs from the instant claim in failing to teach that the return pipe branches in the cleaning machine; wherein when the cleaning machine is in operation, the wafer cleaning water is configured to be ejected from the ejection portion toward a wafer, or part of the wafer cleaning water is configured to be ejected from the ejection portion toward the wafer while the remaining wafer cleaning water that is not ejected from the ejection portion is configured to be returned to the reservoir through the return pipe as the wafer cleaning water which is excessive, and wherein when the cleaning machine is not in operation, the wafer cleaning water is configured to be returned to the reservoir through the return pipe as the wafer cleaning water which is excessive.
Iwata teaches a similar wafer cleaning system (FIG. 1 paragraph [0042] substrate treatment apparatus 1). Iwata teaches the return pipe branches in the cleaning machine (FIG. 1 return pipe 28 is located in treatment chamber 2).
Therefore, 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 wafer cleaning water supply device as taught by Morita with a return piping within a treatment chamber as taught by Iwata. It is known in the art to have a return piping so that excess liquid can be returned to the reservoir. Having a return piping within a treatment chamber is one variation in which excess fluid can return to the reservoir.
Takaki teaches a similar wafer cleaning system (FIG. 1 paragraph [0011] substrate liquid processing apparatus). Takaki teaches:
wherein when the cleaning machine is in operation, the wafer cleaning water is configured to be ejected from the ejection portion toward a wafer (FIG. 1 paragraph [0026] a distal end of each first branch line 112 is connected to a first nozzle 304 in order to supply processing liquid to the upper surface of the substrate W), or part of the wafer cleaning water is configured to be ejected from the ejection portion toward the wafer while the remaining wafer cleaning water that is not ejected from the ejection portion is configured to be returned to the reservoir through the return pipe as the wafer cleaning water which is excessive (FIG. 1 paragraph [0042] the remaining processing liquid which does not go to the liquid processing unit 300 passes through the first circulation path 104 and then returns to the first tank 102), and
wherein when the cleaning machine is not in operation, the wafer cleaning water is configured to be returned to the reservoir through the return pipe as the wafer cleaning water which is excessive (FIG. 1 paragraph [0025] first circulation path 104 forms a path in which processing liquid is ejected from the first tank 102 and returns to the first tank 102).
Therefore, 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 wafer cleaning water supply device as taught by Morita with a way to return the processing liquid depending on the operating state of the cleaning machine as taught by Takaki. It would be obvious that processing liquid that is not ejected to the nozzle would return to the reservoir. Additionally, it is known in the art that if a cleaning machine is not in operation, a return pipe would still function in order to prevent the liquid from being stagnant in a pipe and to constantly mix liquids within the pipes and reservoir.
Examiner regards the operation of the claimed wafer cleaning water supply device as intended use of the apparatus’ structure. The wafer cleaning water production unit would be capable of handling water in which a predetermined amount of chemical agent is dissolved (paragraph [0034]). Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does. An apparatus claim may be unobvious even if it operates in the same way as the prior art, as long as there are structural differences. Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc. 15 USPQ 2d 1525 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Morita does not teach that the return pipe branches at a point of 6m or less from the wafer cleaning water ejection portion of the cleaning machine. However, absent the demonstration of any new or unobvious results, the claimed sizes/ proportions are considered by Examiner to be prima facie obvious as a change in size/ proportion. The applicant’s claimed distance of 6m or less would have been obvious, as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that such a distance would not have changed the functionality of the return pipe in Morita. It is old and well known to change sizes/proportions, with no change in their respective functions, as a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious. See MPEP § 2144.04, IV, A. Changes in Size/Proportion.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to determine an optimal distance of the return pipe from the wafer cleaning water ejection portion through routine experimentation, and that the claimed distance would have been found obvious through such routine experimentation. Additionally, having a distance that is minimized would reduce the amount of pipe material and water usage that is needed to operate the equipment.
As to Claim 3, (Previously Presented) Morita further teaches:
the wafer cleaning water production unit comprises a chemical agent tank which stores the chemical agent that is a liquid (FIG. 3 paragraph [0037] chemical solution tank 15), and
the wafer cleaning water production unit has at least one configuration of (1) or (2):
(1) the water cleaning water production unit further comprises a liquid supply pump (FIG. 3 paragraph [0037] chemical injection pump 16) to transport and add the chemical agent to the ultrapure water (paragraph [0037] chemical solution is injected into water line 1 by chemical injection pump 16);
(2) the chemical agent tank is a closed tank and the water cleaning water production unit further comprises a pressure-feeding unit that supplies inert gas (FIG. 5 paragraph [0038] inert gas is supplied to chemical solution tank 15) to the closed tank such that the chemical agent is pushed out from the chemical agent tank and added to the ultrapure water (paragraph [0038] gas pressure is applied to chemical solution tank 15 in order to inject chemical solution into water line 1).
As to Claim 4, (Previously Presented) Morita further teaches the reservoir comprises a a water level detector (FIG. 1 paragraph [0027] water level sensor 4a) which detects a water level of the wafer cleaning water in the reservoir (paragraph [0027] water level sensor 4a detects the water level in storage tank 4), and the wafer cleaning water supply device further comprises a controller (FIG. 1 paragraph [0027] controller 2a) to control start/stop of production of the wafer cleaning water in the wafer cleaning water production unit (paragraph [0012] production of cleaning water production unit can be suspended) based on liquid level information obtained by the water level detector.
As to Claim 5, (Previously Presented) Morita further teaches the reservoir comprises a water level detector (FIG. 1 paragraph [0027] water level sensor 4a) which detects a water level of the wafer cleaning water in the reservoir (paragraph [0027] water level sensor 4a detects the water level in storage tank 4), and the wafer cleaning water supply device further comprises a controller (FIG. 1 paragraph [0027] controller 2a) to control a production amount of the wafer cleaning water in the wafer cleaning water production unit to a production level among a predetermined multiple production levels, based on liquid level information obtained by the water level detector (paragraph [0013] production flow rate increases or decreases dependent on the water level in the storage tank 4).
As to Claim 6, (Previously Presented) Morita further teaches a discharge port (FIG. 1 paragraph [0026] piping 3) provided between the wafer cleaning water production unit and the reservoir.
As to Claim 7, (Previously Presented) Morita further teaches the discharge port (FIG. 1 paragraph [0026] piping 3) is connected to a discharge path (FIG. 1 paragraph [0026] drain piping 6) that communicates with a supply source for the ultrapure water (FIG. 3 drain piping 3 is in communication with water line 1), and the discharge path is provided with an ion exchange device and/or a catalyst device (FIG. 2 paragraph [0050] removal unit 13 can be ion exchange device or a platinum group catalyst) capable of removing a chemical agent component in the wafer cleaning water.
As to Claim 8, (Previously Presented) Morita further teaches the production unit comprises a dissolved-oxygen-removal unit (FIG. 7 paragraph [0040] deaeration device 20) which removes dissolved oxygen from the ultrapure water (FIG. 8 paragraph [0041] deaeration device 20 can be installed on water line 1) or the wafer cleaning water (FIG. 7 paragraph [0040] deaeration device 20 can be installed on piping 3).
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 LAUREN G ORTA whose telephone number is (703)756-5455. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30-5:00.
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, Michael Barr can be reached at 571-272-1414. 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.
/L.G.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1711
/MICHAEL E BARR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1711
Prosecution Insights