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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "244" and "2444" have both been used to designate second branch line (SEE [0073]). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "2448" and "2488" have both been used to designate supply line heater (SEE [0092]). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jung et al (KR20180079548). Jung et al discloses a substrate processing apparatus comprising: a chamber body (4000) providing a processing space (Figure 3) for drying a substrate (S) (SEE [0033]) with a drying fluid (carbon dioxide) in a supercritical state; a substrate support chuck (4620) supporting the substrate in the processing space; a fluid supply unit comprising a fluid supply line (4550) configured to supply the drying fluid to the processing space; and a supply line heating unit (4554) configured to heat the fluid supply line, wherein the fluid supply line comprises: a main line (4550a); a first branch line (455b) which is branched from the main line and which supplies the drying fluid to an upper portion of the processing space; and a second branch line (4550c) which is branched from the main line and which supplies the drying fluid to a lower portion of the processing space (SEE Figure 3), and wherein the supply line heating unit (4554) includes a fluid injection line (interpreted as the line feeding into the heater 4554 in Figure 4) that is configured to inject a heating fluid in which a temperature thereof is increased into the main line (455a) of the fluid supply line. In re claim 6, Jung et al further discloses a controller (5000) configured to cause, in an idle mode, the supply line heating unit to heat the heating fluid and the fluid supply unit to supply the heating fluid to the processing space along the fluid supply line (SEE [0089]-[0091]). In re claim 7, Jung et al discloses a vent line (4700) connected to the processing space of the chamber body and configured to release the heating fluid from the processing space; and a fluid collect line connecting the vent line to the supply line heating unit and configured to collect the heating fluid introduced into the processing space to the supply line heating unit (SEE [0081]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 4 & 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al in view of Toshima et al (2011/0214694). Jung et al discloses the applicants primary inventive concept as stated above but does not specify what the heating fluid is however does specify that the supercritical fluid is carbon dioxide. Toshima et al teaches a supply line heating unit (45, 452) configured to heat a heating fluid (nitrogen) therein and heat the fluid supply line using the heating fluid. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the applicants claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the subject matter pertains to have modified the substrate processing apparatus of Jung et al by selecting an inert gas such as nitrogen as was commonly known in the art and taught by Toshima et al and arrived at the applicants claimed invention for the purpose of heating the supply line thus preventing the incoming fluid from cooling too much as it travels to the chamber. In re claim 5, Jung et al as modified by Toshima et al would meet the limitations of the applicants claimed invention since nitrogen has a thermal conductivity higher than a thermal conductivity of the drying fluid (carbon dioxide).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-12 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.
Claims 13-17, 19 and 20 are allowed.
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 GREGORY A WILSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4882. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 7:00am-4:30pm.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at 571-272-9059. 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.
/GREGORY A WILSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762 July 1, 2026
Prosecution Insights