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 12/19/2025, regarding the rejection of claims 1 and 4-7, under 35 U.S.C. 102 as anticipated by WO 2018/179493, or obvious under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Gan et al patent publication WO 2018/179493, and the accompanying English translation (Gan) in view of Takahashi US 2003/0082865 (Takahashi) 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 Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.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 under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Gan et al patent publication WO 2018/179493, and the accompanying English translation (Gan) in view of Takahashi US 2003/0082865 (Takahashi), Patent Publication JP 2008086879 and the accompanying English translation thereof (Publication ‘879) and Imaoka et al patent 6,290,777 (Imaoka)
It is argued that neither Gan publication WO 2018/179493, nor the prior art generally, teaches wherein a control device is capable of controlling, in coordination, the inert gas dissolution mechanism and the pH adjuster addition mechanism and/or the redox potential adjuster based on the pH and redox potential measured by the water quality monitoring mechanism.
In support of such argument, it is reasoned that Gan ‘493 does not address the problem of minimizing the dissolution of metals during a rinsing step of a semiconductor water on which molybdenum is exposed partially or entirely on a wafer surface; and because of this does not provide any motivation to modify the adjusted water to have pH of 0 to 5, redox potential of -0.4 to +0.4, dissolved oxygen concentration of 50 ppb or less, and a hydrogen concentration of 1000 ppm or less, as recited in claim 1.
It is submitted that Gan publication ‘493 does teach or suggest the instantly claimed pH, redox potential and DO concentrations, as detailed in later paragraphs addressing the Arguments, thus does not require additional motivation to achieve such water values.
Turning to JP ‘897, it is pointed out that the problem addressed in this reference is to provide an ultrapure water production device and method capable of dissolving a gas at any arbitrary concentration below saturation and enable adjustment of cavitation force when such produced water is used for ultrasonic cleaning, with the gas being handled being merely dissolved nitrogen gas. It is argued that JP ‘897 contains no disclosure or suggestion of managing a pH adjuster and/or a redox potential adjuster from the standpoint of suppressing metal dissolution, and thus it would not be obvious to combine Gan WO ‘493 and JP ‘879 to arrive at the device of claim 1. achieve the instantly claimed combination of pH, dissolved oxygen (DO) and redox levels.
It is also submitted that the argument regarding specifically how water produced by the production device is used or not used are not commensurate with, or correspond to what is positively recited and required by instant apparatus or device claim 1 in the following aspects:
It is further submitted that publication ‘493 further discloses wherein a cleaning target of the pH/redox potential-adjusted water is a semiconductor material, requiring cleaning and rinsing with ultrapure water (paras regarding Background-Art).
The recitation of particular qualities or constituent parameters of water being handled and treated by the device, particular material of the semiconductor being worked on by the produced production water (semiconductor material on which molybdenum is partially or fully exposed), and resulting effect of treating the water by the device (suppressing dissolution of metals) are all deemed to be of little patentable weight, since recitation of what the semiconductor material comprises does not further limit the device by introducing or further limiting a structural feature of the device.
The ultrapure water production device of ‘493 is capable of being effectively used for cleaning and rinsing of any electronic components, and specifically semiconductor devices.
The MPEP at Section 2114 cites case law that states that apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does and that claiming the manner to which a claimed apparatus is to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus.
The claims also optionally may be considered to differ by reciting that the semiconductor material is a material, on which a chromium group element is partially or entirely exposed.
Additionally, Takahashi teaches a semiconductor device which utilizes ultrapure water, in which the semiconductor device comprises such material in which a chromium group element or compound of molybdenum, is partially exposed by patterning or pattern etching (See the Abstract and [0221-0223 re the semiconductor material being worked on having a molybdenum silicide film or layer which is etched and patterned and 0225 re cleaning of such semiconductor device during fabrication to produce integrated circuit devices]) .
It would have been thus obvious to the skilled artisan for utilization of producing ultrapure water for producing semiconductor devices, to have optionally have provided the water as produced by ‘493, for utilizing the produced ultrapure water for producing such type of semiconductor device having a molybdenum silicide film or layer which is etched and patterned, and to have utilized the water in the production of such devices, as taught by Takahashi, in order to efficiently produce commercially valuable semiconductor integrated circuit devices, such as logic circuits (Takahashi at [0225]).
It is also submitted that ‘493 further suggests wherein the produced pH/redox potential-adjusted water has a pH of 0 to 5 (para re “PH adjuster”, see , “When adjusting to less than pH 7, hydrochloric acid, nitric acid, a sulfuric acid, hydrofluoric acid, etc. can be used.”), and
explicitly discloses a redox potential of —0.4 to +0.4 V (in the 4th para re “Production method of pH/redox potential adjustment water”, see “For example, when used as cleaning water for a wafer with an exposed transition metal such as copper or cobalt, the injection amount may be controlled so that the oxidation-reduction potential is 0 to 1.7 V at pH 9 to 13.”), and
also suggests achieving a dissolved oxygen concentration of 50 ppb or less (in the 5th para re “Production method of pH/redox potential adjustment water”, see “It is desirable in that the effect of removing dissolved oxygen is further enhanced). The inert gas is not particularly limited, and rare gas or nitrogen gas can be used. In particular, nitrogen can be suitably used because it is easily available and is inexpensive even at a high purity level. Thereby, the dissolved oxygen concentration of the adjustment water W1 can be reduced to a very low level.”).
It is submitted that although the claims differ from what is explicitly disclosed by ‘493 by explicitly reciting the water as having a pH of “0 to 5” and the dissolved oxygen (DO) level being 50 ppb or less, the disclosed system inherently is operable to reduce the water pH to the claimed moderately to highly acidic levels given disclosure as described relative to claim 1 regarding optional addition of strong acids to the water, and also is inherently operable to reduce the water DO levels to such low levels given disclosure of membrane deaerator 4 having the effect of further enhancing removal of dissolved oxygen.
The ‘493 device would be obviously capable of being configured to achieve the instantly claimed pH and DO levels, by routine experimentation regarding amount of strong acid to inject into the water and by adjustment of control of relative flow rates and applied pressures of water flow and sweep gas through the membrane deaerator 4 as discussed in the in the 5th para re “Production method of pH/redox potential adjustment water”.
Additionally, the achieved pH, redox potential and DO levels of the water are deemed to constitute Results effective variables which are obvious to optimize by routine experimentation in order to provide water qualities necessary for use in the disclosed manufacture of semiconductors (see Background-Art paras of Gan ‘493 re semiconductor or other electronic component manufacturing processing).
The MPEP at Sections 2144.04 and 2144.05 cites Case Law regarding insufficiency of patentably distinguishing based on changes in proportion or ranges of parameters, or where the prior art teaches overlapping, approaching or similar ranges, amounts or proportions, relative to what is claimed absent a showing of unexpected results.
Additionally, Gan (publication ‘493) discloses wherein the water quality monitoring mechanism has an inert gas concentration measuring device Publication ‘493 discloses in the last paragraph preceding the “Test Example 1-1” the following: (For example, instruments such as a flow meter, a thermometer, a pressure gauge, and a gas concentration meter can be provided at an arbitrary place.”)
Publication ‘879 teaches to also provide ultrapurified water for washing and rinsing semiconductor substrates and other electronic component devices (paragraphs 1-3 in the Background-Art Section of the translation), and providing of a device employing a membrane degasification unit 16 to which nitrogen or inert gas is added, along with a downstream gas concentration meter and control device 17 which controls the amount of nitrogen which is added to the degasification unit, and
see in the paragraph beginning “B is a secondary pure water system, “The gas dissolving device 16 includes a gas permeable membrane, and is configured to add nitrogen gas to the degassed, treated water through the gas permeable membrane and dissolve it. The gas flow rate control device 17 is configured to control the flow rate of the nitrogen gas supplied to the gas dissolving device 16 to a predetermined flow rate set in advance. At this time, the dissolved nitrogen concentration meter N dissolves the dissolved nitrogen gas in the dissolved water.”).
Moreover, newly applied Imaoka teaches to provide high-purity or ultrapure wash water for washing electronics parts, such as silicon or semiconductor wafers, to remove impurities (Abstract and column 5, lines 9-22 and column 7, lines 1-16). Imaoka also teaches such cleaning, especially to remove organic impurities from the surface of electronic parts , is best achieved in water having an acidic pH, preferably within a range of 3-7 thus overlapping the claimed pH range, having a monitored, negative redox potential, and having a controlled low dissolved, added, hydrogen gas concentration such as 0.05 ppm or more, and having a low content of hydrogen peroxide so as to reduce need for providing elevated cleaning temperatures, increased amount of water for rinsing, and air venting (column 4, lines 7-30).
Imaoka also teaches in a “Second Embodiment” to monitor and control the cleaning water pH to be in a controlled range of 3-7, to have a low, controlled range of dissolved hydrogen, oxygen and inert nitrogen gases of less than 10 ppm and controlled ORP value of about -200 mV (i.e. about -.2V), (see column 17, line 23- column 19, line 19 and Table 4 spanning columns 19 and 20).
Imaoka teaches such monitoring and control being achieved by combination of monitoring devices 18, 19 and 20 and controlling unit 30 (figures 1 and 5 and column 9, line 38-column 10, line 5 regarding redox potentiometer to monitor redox and pH and gas concentrations).
Imaoka teaches that such monitored and controlled pH, redox potential and gas and inert gas concentration results in cleaning water having reduced formation of oxide film and surface roughening, thus inherently suppressing dissolution of metals (column 17, lines 23-29).
In summary, there is motivation and obviousness to one of ordinary skill in the art of producing purified water to have modified or further modified the Gan ‘493 device, in view of cumulative teachings of Takahashi and Imaoka,
by equipping the water quality monitoring mechanism, with the inert gas concentration measuring device, and accompanied by modifying the control device of ‘493 so as to be capable of controlling, in coordination, the inert gas dissolution mechanism and the pH adjuster and/or redox potential adjuster, measured by the water quality monitoring mechanism,
so as to optimize removal of metal and organic contaminants, including minimizing of oxide film and roughening on surfaces, thus dissolution of metals, thereby producing higher quality semiconductor wafers.
Such modification, hence would also result in the argued and instantly claimed objective of suppressing dissolution of metals from water produced from the claimed production device.
Thus, Applicant’s arguments presented 12/19/2025 with regard to the rejection of the instant claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103 are not persuasive.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a control device that controls the pH adjuster mechanism and the redox potential adjuster mechanism based on the pH and redox potential measured by the water quality monitoring mechanism” in claim 1.
Because this claim limitation is being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), it is being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in paragraphs [0027], [0041], [0042] and [0051] of the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof; such specification portion describing the control means or device as any structure capable of receiving input from monitoring and measuring mechanisms and using feed-forward to determine controlling functions.
If applicant does not intend to have this limitation interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation recites sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
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.
Claims 1 and 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
In claim 1, in the clause beginning “wherein the water quality monitoring mechanism”, the recitation of the control device being capable of controlling, in coordination, the inert gas dissolution mechanism and the pH adjuster addition mechanism and/or the redox potential adjuster, is inconsistent with such being based on “the pH and redox potential measured by the water quality mechanism”,
since control of the inert gas dissolution mechanism would necessarily be based at least in part, on values of inert gas concentration, such as measured by the recited inert gas concentration mechanism, and
since such optionally controlled pH adjuster mechanism and optionally controlled redox potential adjuster, would necessarily be based on pH and redox potential, respectively.
Also in claim 1, the recitation of “suppressing of dissolution of metals” is a relative, vague and indefinite phrase, since the claim lacks any standards for quantifying or describing rate or amount of dissolving of any particular metal in a given relative volume of water or other material, having defined characteristics such as pH and temperature values, and no point(s) of reference or comparison are stated.
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 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as anticipated by Gan et al Patent Publication WO 2018179493 and the accompanying English translation thereof (Publication ‘493 or Gan) in view of Takahashi et al PGPUBS Document US 2003/0082865 (Takahashi), Patent Publication JP 2008086879 and the accompanying English translation thereof (Publication ‘879) and Imaoka et al patent 6,290,777 (Imaoka).
Referenced paragraph numbers of the applied USPGPUBS Document are identified with “[ ]” symbols.
For independent claim 1, Publication ‘493 discloses a production device (having units as illustrated in figure 1) for pH/redox potential-adjusted water that produces adjusted water having desired pH and redox potential by adding a pH adjuster and a redox potential adjuster to ultrapure water, comprising:
a hydrogen peroxide removal mechanism (2) provided in an ultrapure water supply line (1), (Para describing “Carrier resin” see “In the platinum group metal-supported resin column 2, an ion exchange resin can be used… the resin surface becomes alkaline and promotes decomposition of hydrogen peroxide”);
a pH adjuster addition mechanism (3A) and a redox potential adjuster addition mechanism (3B) that are provided downstream of the hydrogen peroxide removal mechanism (para describing Fig.1 “In this embodiment, the pH adjustment agent injection device 3A and the oxidation-reduction potential adjustment agent are provided.”);
a degassing mechanism (4) provided downstream of the pH adjuster addition mechanism and/or the redox potential adjuster addition mechanism (para describing Fig. 1 “; A membrane type deaeration device 4 and a gas dissolution membrane device 5 are sequentially provided in the subsequent stage of the injection device 3B.”), and
an inert gas dissolution mechanism (5) provided downstream of the degassing mechanism (para describing Fig. 1 “ An inert gas source 6 is connected to the gas phase side of the membrane degassing device 4, and an inert gas source 7 is also connected to the gas phase side of the gas dissolving membrane device 5.”…”A membrane type deaeration device 4 and a gas dissolution membrane device 5 are sequentially provided in the subsequent stage of the injection device 3B.”).
Gan (‘493) further suggests wherein the produced pH/redox potential-adjusted water has a pH of 0 to 5 (para re “PH adjuster”, see , “When adjusting to less than pH 7, hydrochloric acid, nitric acid, a sulfuric acid, hydrofluoric acid, etc. can be used.”), and
explicitly discloses a redox potential of —0.4 to +0.4 V (in the 4th para re “Production method of pH/redox potential adjustment water”, see “For example, when used as cleaning water for a wafer with an exposed transition metal such as copper or cobalt, the injection amount may be controlled so that the oxidation-reduction potential is 0 to 1.7 V at pH 9 to 13.”), and
also suggests achieving a dissolved oxygen concentration of 50 ppb or less (in the 5th para re “Production method of pH/redox potential adjustment water”, see “It is desirable in that the effect of removing dissolved oxygen is further enhanced). The inert gas is not particularly limited, and rare gas or nitrogen gas can be used. In particular, nitrogen can be suitably used because it is easily available and is inexpensive even at a high purity level. Thereby, the dissolved oxygen concentration of the adjustment water W1 can be reduced to a very low level.”).
Although the claims differ from what is explicitly disclosed by ‘493 by explicitly reciting the water as having a pH of “0 to 5” and the dissolved oxygen (DO) level being 50 ppb or less, the disclosed system inherently is operable to reduce the water pH to the claimed moderately to highly acidic levels given disclosure as described relative to claim 1 regarding optional addition of strong acids to the water, and also is inherently operable to reduce the water DO levels to such low levels given disclosure of membrane deaerator 4 having the effect of further enhancing removal of dissolved oxygen.
The ‘493 device would be obviously capable of being configured to achieve the instantly claimed pH and DO levels, by routine experimentation, regarding amount of strong acid to inject into the water and by adjustment of control of relative flow rates and applied pressures of water flow and sweep gas through the membrane deaerator 4 as discussed in the in the 5th para re “Production method of pH/redox potential adjustment water”.
The achieved pH, redox potential and DO levels of the water are deemed to constitute Results effective variables which are obvious to optimize by routine experimentation in order to provide water qualities necessary for use in the disclosed manufacture of semiconductors (see Background-Art paras re semiconductor or other electronic component manufacturing processing).
The MPEP at Sections 2144.04 and 2144.05 cites Case Law regarding insufficiency of patentably distinguishing based on changes in proportion or ranges of parameters, or where the prior art teaches overlapping, approaching or similar ranges, amounts or proportions, relative to what is claimed absent a showing of unexpected results.
Gan or Publication ‘493 further discloses:
the production device further comprising:
a water quality monitoring mechanism for monitoring the pH and redox potential of the adjusted water having pH and redox potential; and,
a control device (11) that controls the pH adjuster addition mechanism and the redox potential adjuster addition mechanism based on the pH and redox potential measured by the water quality monitoring mechanism
(para describing Fig. 1 In the present embodiment, a pH meter 10A as a pH measuring unit and an ORP meter 10B as a redox potential measuring unit are provided in the middle of the discharge line 8, and the pH meter 10A and the ORP meter 10B a control are connected to a control device 11 such as a personal computer. On the other hand, the control device 11 is also connected to the pH adjusting agent injecting device 3A and the oxidation-reduction potential adjusting agent injecting device 3B, and can control the injection amount of the medicine and the like from these devices 3A and 3B.”).
Claim 1 differs by requiring wherein the produced adjusted water also has a hydrogen peroxide concentration of 1000 ppm or less.
Gan (publication ‘493) also discloses wherein the water quality monitoring mechanism has an inert gas concentration measuring device Publication ‘493 discloses in the last paragraph preceding the “Test Example 1-1” the following: (For example, instruments such as a flow meter, a thermometer, a pressure gauge, and a gas concentration meter can be provided at an arbitrary place.”)
Claim 1 also differs by requiring wherein the water quality monitoring mechanism is capable of controlling the inert gas dissolution mechanism, the pH adjuster addition mechanism and/or the redox potential adjuster, in coordination, the inert gas dissolution mechanism and the pH adjuster addition mechanism and/or the redox potential adjuster based on the pH and redox potential measured by the water quality monitoring mechanism.
Publication ‘879 teaches to also provide ultrapurified water for washing and rinsing semiconductor substrates and other electronic component devices (paragraphs 1-3 in the Background-Art Section of the translation), and providing of a device employing a membrane degasification unit 16 to which nitrogen or inert gas is added, along with a downstream gas concentration meter and control device 17 which controls the amount of nitrogen which is added to the degasification unit, and
see in the paragraph beginning “B is a secondary pure water system, “The gas dissolving device 16 includes a gas permeable membrane, and is configured to add nitrogen gas to the degassed, treated water through the gas permeable membrane and dissolve it. The gas flow rate control device 17 is configured to control the flow rate of the nitrogen gas supplied to the gas dissolving device 16 to a predetermined flow rate set in advance. At this time, the dissolved nitrogen concentration meter N dissolves the dissolved nitrogen gas in the dissolved water.”).
Moreover, Imaoka teaches to provide high-purity or ultrapure wash water for washing electronics parts, such as silicon or semiconductor wafers, to remove impurities (Abstract and column 5, lines 9-22 and column 7, lines 1-16). Imaoka also teaches such cleaning, especially to remove organic impurities from the surface of electronic parts , is best achieved in water having an acidic pH, preferably within a range of 3-7 thus overlapping the claimed pH range, having a monitored, negative redox potential, and having a controlled low dissolved, added, hydrogen gas concentration such as 0.05 ppm or more, and having a low content of hydrogen peroxide so as to reduce need for providing elevated cleaning temperatures, increased amount of water for rinsing, and air venting (column 4, lines 7-30).
Imaoka also teaches in a “Second Embodiment” to monitor and control the cleaning water pH to be in a controlled range of 3-7, to have a low, controlled range of dissolved hydrogen, oxygen and inert nitrogen gases of less than 10 ppm and controlled ORP value of about -200 mV (i.e. about -.2V), (see column 17, line 23- column 19, line 19 and Table 4 spanning columns 19 and 20).
Imaoka teaches such monitoring and control being achieved by combination of monitoring devices 18, 19 and 20 and controlling unit 30 (figures 1 and 5 and column 9, line 38-column 10, line 5 regarding redox potentiometer to monitor redox and pH and gas concentrations).
Imaoka teaches that such monitored and controlled pH, redox potential and gas and inert gas concentration results in cleaning water having reduced formation of oxide film and surface roughening, thus inherently suppressing dissolution of metals (column 17, lines 23-29).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of producing purified water to have modified or further modified the Gan ‘493 device, in view of cumulative teachings of Takahashi and Imaoka,
by equipping the water quality monitoring mechanism, with the inert gas concentration measuring device, and accompanied by modifying the control device of ‘493 so as to be capable of controlling, in coordination, the inert gas dissolution mechanism and the pH adjuster and/or redox potential adjuster, measured by the water quality monitoring mechanism,
so as to optimize removal of metal and organic contaminants, including minimizing of oxide film and roughening on surfaces, thus dissolution of metals, thereby producing higher quality semiconductor wafers.
Publication ‘493 further discloses wherein a cleaning target of the pH/redox potential-adjusted water is a semiconductor material, requiring cleaning and rinsing with ultrapure water (paras regarding Background-Art).
Claim 1 also differs by requiring wherein the adjusted water having pH and redox potential produced is suitable for cleaning a semiconductor material on which molybdenum is partially or entirely exposed, thereby suppressing dissolution of metals.
The recitation of the material of the semiconductor being worked on by the produced production water, is deemed to be of little patentable weight, since recitation of what the semiconductor material comprises does not further limit the device by introducing or further limiting a structural feature. The ultrapure water production device of ‘493 is inherently capable of being effectively used for cleaning and rinsing of any electronic components, or specifically semiconductor devices.
The MPEP at Section 2114 cites case law that states that apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does and that claiming the manner to which a claimed apparatus is to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus.
Additionally, Takahashi teaches a semiconductor device which utilizes ultrapure water, in which the semiconductor device comprises such material in which a chromium group element or compound of molybdenum, is partially exposed by patterning or pattern etching (See the Abstract and [0221-0223 re the semiconductor material being worked on having a molybdenum silicide film or layer which is etched and patterned and 0225 re cleaning of such semiconductor device during fabrication to produce integrated circuit devices]) .
It would have been thus additionally obvious to the skilled artisan for utilization of producing ultrapure water for producing semiconductor devices, to have optionally have provided the water as produced by ‘493, for utilizing the produced ultrapure water for producing or processing such type of semiconductor device, as taught by Takahashi, in order to efficiently produce commercially valuable semiconductor integrated circuit devices, such as logic circuits (Takahashi at [0225]).
Publication ‘493 further discloses:
for claim 4, wherein the pH adjuster is one or more selected from hydrochloric acid, nitric acid, acetic acid, and CO2 gas (para describing “PH adjuster”, “When adjusting to less than pH 7, hydrochloric acid, nitric acid, a sulfuric acid, hydrofluoric acid, etc. can be used.”,
the redox potential adjuster is one or more selected from oxalic acid, hydrogen sulfide, potassium iodide, and hydrogen gas (para describing Redox potential regulator In order to adjust the redox potential to the negative side, it is preferable to use a liquid such as oxalic acid or a gas body such as hydrogen.) , and
the inert gas is one or more selected from nitrogen, argon, and helium (para beginning “In this embodiment”, “The inert gas is not particularly limited, and rare gas or nitrogen gas can be used. In particular, nitrogen can be suitably used because it is easily available and is inexpensive even at a high purity level. By using such a gas-dissolving membrane module, the inert gas can be easily dissolved in water, and the dissolved gas concentration can be easily adjusted and managed.”);
for claim 5, wherein the pH adjuster or the redox potential adjuster is a liquid (para concerning PH adjuster” re “hydrochloric…hydrofluoric acid, “acid” being a form of liquid, and para re redox potential regulator re the use of hydrogen peroxide liquid), and
the pH adjuster addition mechanism or the redox potential adjuster addition mechanism includes a pump that supplies the liquid pH adjuster or redox potential adjuster, or,
a pressurizing and pushing-out device that uses an inert gas to push out and supply the liquid pH adjuster or redox potential adjuster from a tank that stores the liquid pH adjuster or redox potential adjuster (see in para re the adjuster injection devices in the present embodiment, the injection device is not particularly limited, and a general chemical injection device can be used. When the pH adjusting agent or redox potential adjusting agent is liquid, a pump such as a diaphragm pump can be used. In addition, a pressurizing pump in which a pH adjusting agent or an oxidation-reduction potential adjusting agent is put in an airtight container together with an inert gas such as N .sub.2 gas, and these agents are pushed out by the pressure of the inert gas can be suitably used.”);
for claim 6, wherein the pH adjuster or the redox potential adjuster is a gas, and
the pH adjuster addition mechanism or the redox potential adjuster addition mechanism is a gas dissolution means device using a gas- permeable membrane module or a direct gas-liquid contactor (para concerning Redox potential regulator “In order to adjust the redox potential to the negative side, it is preferable to use a liquid such as oxalic acid or a gas body such as hydrogen. and para re “membrane type deaerator”) ; and,
for claim 7, wherein the inert gas dissolution mechanism is a gas dissolution means using a gas-permeable membrane module or a direct gas-liquid contactor (para re “membrane type deaerator” and para starting “Gas dissolution membrane device”, “In the present embodiment, the gas dissolving membrane device 5 causes the ultrapure water W to flow on one side (liquid phase side) of the gas permeable membrane, and causes the gas to flow on the other side (gas phase side) to move to the liquid phase side…. In this embodiment, an inert gas such as nitrogen is used as the gas dissolved in the water, and this inert gas is supplied from the inert gas source 7.”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Primary Examiner Joseph Drodge at his direct government telephone number of 571-272-1140. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from approximately 8:00 AM to 1:00PM and 2:30 PM to 5:30 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 are unsuccessful, the examiner' s supervisor, Benjamin Lebron, of Technology Center Unit 1773, can reached at 571-272-0475.
The formal facsimile phone number, for official, formal communications, for the examining group where this application is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from the Patent Examiner. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. Visit https:///www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https:///www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/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.
JWD
01/06/2026
/JOSEPH W DRODGE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773