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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CRF 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 08/24/2026 has been entered.
Status
In response to the amendment filed on 08/24/2026, claims 1, 6, 9, 13, and 22 have been amended. Claims 15 and 18-20 were previously cancelled. Claims 1-14, 16, 17, and 21-24 are pending and under examination.
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 1-6 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weber et al. (WO 2006105785A1, hereinafter Weber), in view of Riyuu (JP H09290367A) and Nakagawa et al. (EP 0323518A1, hereinafter Nakagawa).
Regarding claim 1, Weber discloses a wafer polishing head, comprising:
a carrier head configured to hold a workpiece (figs. 1-2 and Weber English translation, p. 8:16-18, a receiving means 3 comprising a base plate 8 and a drive shaft 9 is the recited carrier head used for receiving a workpiece 1);
a plurality of first piezoelectric actuators, disposed in a first ring-shaped region of the carrier head (figs. 2-3 and Weber English translation, p. 9:19-23, 10:30-33, a sandwich structure 21b can be designated as the recited first ring-shaped region. A plurality of actuators 15 is evenly distributed over circumference of the ring structure. The sandwich structures 21a-f are disposed in the recited carrier head);
a plurality of second piezoelectric actuators, disposed in a second ring-shaped region of the carrier head, wherein the second ring-shaped region surrounds the first ring-shaped region (figs. 2-3 and Weber English translation, p. 9:19-23, 10:30-33, a sandwich structure 21c can be designated as the recited second ring-shaped region. A plurality of actuators 15 is evenly distributed over circumference of the ring structure. The sandwich structure 21c surrounds the sandwich structure 21b); and
a membrane, disposed over the plurality of first piezoelectric actuators and the plurality of second piezoelectric actuators (fig. 2 and Weber English translation, p. 9:19-23, a flexible membrane 20 is disposed over the plurality of actuators 15), but does not disclose the membrane is configured to directly contact the workpiece during a polishing.
Riyuu teaches, in an analogous chemical mechanical polishing (CMP) field of endeavor, the membrane is configured to directly contact the workpiece during a polishing (Riyuu English translation, p. 7:5-8, 10:4-7 and figs. 3-4, a wafer polishing head 13 [corresponds to the recited carrier head] comprises piezoelectric actuators 23. A flexible carrier plate 38 and an insert 54 form the recited membrane. They are disposed underneath the actuators 23 and plates 23, and are configured to directly contact a wafer 12 [corresponds to the recited workpiece] during polishing. Weber discloses the membrane disposed between the plates. It can be modified by Riyuu to dispose the membrane below the plates to contact the workpiece directly).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the carrier head of Weber to provide the membrane to contact the workpiece directly as taught by Riyuu. It is soft enough to protect the wafer from rubbing (Riyuu English translation, p. 7:7-8).
Weber as modified by Riyuu does not disclose the plurality of first piezoelectric actuators is connected to a first voltage, and the plurality of second piezoelectric actuators is connected to a second voltage different from the first voltage.
Nakagawa teaches, in an analogous grinding apparatus field of endeavor, the plurality of first piezoelectric actuators is connected to a first voltage, and the plurality of second piezoelectric actuators is connected to a second voltage different from the first voltage (p. 8:18-22, a control device controls a plurality of piezoelectric actuators 401-412. The control device can provide different voltages simultaneously to different piezoelectric actuators. It means the first piezoelectric actuators can receive a single voltage that may be the different voltage to the second piezoelectric actuators).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the wafer polishing head of Weber as modified by Riyuu to provide the different voltages to different piezoelectric actuators as taught by Nakagawa so that it can provide different vibrations to different areas of a workpiece (Nakagawa, p. 2:26-3:3).
Regarding claim 2, Weber as modified by Riyuu and Nakagawa teaches the wafer polishing head as in the rejection of claim 1, further comprising: a plurality of plates, disposed between the membrane and the plurality of first piezoelectric actuators, and between the membrane and the plurality of second piezoelectric actuators (Weber fig. 2, the plate element 17b is disposed between the membrane 20 and the actuators 15 in the sandwich structure 21b [corresponds to the recited first ring-shaped region] and the plate element 17c is disposed between the membrane 20 and the actuators 15 in the sandwich structure 21c [corresponds to the recited second ring-shaped region]).
Regarding claim 3, Weber as modified by Riyuu and Nakagawa teaches the wafer polishing head as in the rejection of claim 2, wherein the plurality of plates comprises a circular-shaped plate overlapping a central region of the membrane, and a plurality of ring-shaped plates individually surrounding the circular-shaped plate and sequentially disposed outward from the circular-shaped plate (Weber figs. 2-3, a circular-shaped plate element 17a is disposed overlapping a central region of the membrane 20 and each ring-shaped plate element 17b-f surrounds the plate element outward sequentially).
Regarding claim 4, Weber as modified by Riyuu and Nakagawa teaches the wafer polishing head as in the rejection of claim 3, wherein the plurality of ring-shaped plated has a first ring-shaped plate surrounding the circular-shaped plate, and a second ring-shaped plate surrounding the first ring-shaped plate and the circular-shaped plate (Weber fig. 2, the ring-shaped plate element 17b [corresponds to the recited first ring-shaped plate] surrounds a circular-shaped plate element 17a, and the ring-shaped plate element 17c [corresponds to the recited second ring-shaped plate] surrounds the ring-shaped plate element 17b and the circular-shaped plate element 17a).
Regarding claim 5, Weber as modified by Riyuu and Nakagawa teaches the wafer polishing head as in the rejection of claim 3, wherein the plurality of first piezoelectric actuators has a substantially same first distance to a center of the circular-shaped plate, and the plurality of second piezoelectric actuators has a substantially same second distance to the center of the circular-shaped plate, and the second distance is greater than the first distance (Weber figs. 2-3, the actuators 15 coupled with the plate element 17b [correspond to the recited first piezoelectric actuators] have a substantially the same first distance to a center of the plate element 17a, and the actuators 15 coupled with the plate element 17c [correspond to the recited second piezoelectric actuators] have a substantially the same second distance to the center of the plate element 17a. The recited second distance is greater than the recited first distance).
Regarding claim 6, Weber as modified by Riyuu and Nakagawa teaches the wafer polishing head as in the rejection of claim 4, wherein each of the first and second ring-shaped plates is a monolithic structure, and the first ring-shaped plate is in contact with the plurality of first piezoelectric actuators, and the second ring-shaped plate is in contact with the plurality of second piezoelectric actuators (Weber figs. 2-3, the plate element 17b [correspond to the recited first ring-shaped plate] is in contact with the corresponding actuators 15 [correspond to the recited first piezoelectric actuators] and the plate element 17c [correspond to the recited second ring-shaped plate] is in contact with the corresponding actuators 15 [correspond to the recited second piezoelectric actuators]. Each plate element 17 has a monolithic structure along the circumference of the ring structure).
Regarding claim 21, Weber as modified by Riyuu and Nakagawa teaches the wafer polishing head as in the rejection of claim 4, wherein a width of the second ring-shaped plate is less than a width of the first ring-shaped plate (Weber fig. 2, a width of the plate element 17c [corresponds to the recited second ring-shaped plate] is less than a width of the plate element 17b [corresponds to the recited first ring-shaped plate]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weber in view of Riyuu and Nakagawa, as applied to claim 4 above, and in further view of Kistler et al. (CN 1481295A, hereinafter Kistler).
Regarding claim 7, Weber as modified by Riyuu and Nakagawa teaches the wafer polishing head as in the rejection of claim 4, but does not disclose each of the first and second ring-shaped plates includes a plurality of sectors, being adjacent to one another.
Kistler teaches, in an analogous chemical mechanical polishing (CMP) field of endeavor, each of the first and second ring-shaped plates includes a plurality of sectors, being adjacent to one another (fig. 8, a CMP apparatus a pressure applying membrane comprises a plurality of piezoelectric elements 702. A ring-shaped piezoelectric element can include a plurality of sectors, being adjacent to one another. Because Weber teaches each plate can be associated with each piezoelectric actuator, Kistler can be combined with Weber to teach each ring-shaped plate can include a plurality of sectors).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the ring-shaped plates of Weber as modified by Riyuu and Nakagawa to provide the plurality of sectors taught by Kistler in order to provide different pressures to a wafer even along the same ring-shaped areas for effective polishing outcome.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weber in view of Riyuu, Nakagawa, and Kistler, as applied to claim 7 above, and in further view of Suen et al. (US 2015/0111477, cited on 10/27/2024 IDS, hereinafter Suen).
Regarding claim 8, Weber as modified by Riyuu, Nakagawa, and Kistler teaches the wafer polishing head as in the rejection of claim 7, but does not disclose explicitly each of the sectors of the first ring-shaped plate is connected to one of the first piezoelectric actuators, and each of the sectors of the second ring-shaped plate is connected to one of the second piezoelectric actuators.
Suen teaches, in an analogous CMP field of endeavor, each of the sectors of the first ring-shaped plate is connected to one of the first piezoelectric actuators, and each of the sectors of the second ring-shaped plate is connected to one of the second piezoelectric actuators (fig. 2 and ¶ 0013 and 0016, a carrier head 110 includes electromagnetism actuated pressure sectors 120 [correspond to the recited piezoelectric actuators]. A plurality of ring-shaped sectors is arranged circumferentially. A profile control of a substrate can be carried out along circumferential lines. It means the pressure sectors along the same ring-shaped circumference are controlled as the same group. Because Weber teaches the plate associated with the piezoelectric element, Weber can be combined with Suen to teach the ring-shaped plates on the same circumference are considered to be in the same group).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the wafer polishing head of Weber as modified by Riyuu, Nakagawa, and Kistler to make the sectors of the ring-shaped plates as the same group as taught by Suen so that areas of wafer located at the same distance from a center can have the same pressure application since the rotating wafer may have the same configuration along a line of the same radius.
Claim 9, 13, 14, 16, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weber et al. (WO 2006105785A1, hereinafter Weber), in view of Riyuu (JP H09290367A), Koike et al. (JP 6596141B1, hereinafter Koike), and Nakagawa et al. (EP 0323518A1, hereinafter Nakagawa).
Regarding claim 9, Large discloses a wafer polishing system, comprising:
a polishing head, configured to hold a substrate against a polishing pad (fig. 1 and Weber English translation, p. 8:1-7, base plate 8 and a drive shaft 9 form a polishing head, and the polishing pad holds a workpiece 1 against a pad 4), the polishing head comprising:
a plurality of piezoelectric actuators, configured to provide mechanical forces against different regions of the substrate (Weber English translation, p. 11:1-7, 12:32-13:4, a plurality of piezoelectric actuators 15 has an actuator function by varying lengths of the actuators which would apply mechanical force against the substrate),
a membrane disposed between the plurality of piezoelectric actuators and the substrate figs. 1-2 and Weber English translation, p. 9:19-23, a flexible membrane 20 is disposed over the plurality of actuators 15 such that the flexible membrane is positioned between the actuators 15 and a workpiece 1 [corresponds to the recited substrate]),
wherein the plurality of piezoelectric actuators grouped into a plurality of first piezoelectric actuators arranged to form a first ring-shaped pattern, and a plurality of second piezoelectric actuators arranged to form a second ring-shaped pattern surrounding the first ring-shaped pattern (figs. 2-3 and Weber English translation, p. 9:19-23, 10:30-33, a sandwich structure 21b can be designated as the recited first ring-shaped pattern and a sandwich structure 21c can be designated as the recited second ring-shaped pattern. A plurality of actuators 15 is evenly distributed over circumference of the ring structure. Thus, a plurality of first actuators is arranged in the first ring-shaped pattern (sandwich structure 21b) and a plurality of second actuators is arranged in the second ring-shaped pattern (sandwich structure 21c). The sandwich structure 21c surrounds the sandwich structure 21b), but does not disclose the membrane is directly in contact the substrate during a polishing.
Riyuu teaches, in the analogous CMP field of endeavor, the membrane is directly in contact the substrate during a polishing (Riyuu English translation, p. 7:5-8, 10:4-7 and figs. 3-4, a wafer polishing head 13 [corresponds to the recited carrier head] comprises piezoelectric actuators 23. A flexible carrier plate 38 and an insert 54 form the recited membrane. They are disposed underneath the actuators 23 and plates 23, and are configured to directly contact a wafer 12 [corresponds to the recited workpiece] during polishing. Weber discloses the membrane disposed between the plates. It can be modified by Riyuu to dispose the membrane below the plates to contact the workpiece directly).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the carrier head of Weber to provide the membrane to contact the workpiece directly as taught by Riyuu. It is soft enough to protect the wafer from rubbing (Riyuu English translation, p. 7:7-8).
Weber as modified by Riyuu does not disclose a control unit, electrically connected to the plurality of piezoelectric actuators, and configured to receive a signal of an electrical charge generated by the plurality of piezoelectric actuators.
Koike teaches, in a piezoelectric device field of endeavor and capable of solving primary problem, a control unit, electrically connected to the plurality of piezoelectric actuators, and configured to receive a signal of an electrical charge generated by the plurality of piezoelectric actuators (Koike English translation, p. 9:22-31, a piezoelectric element comprises a piezoelectric actuator 116 and a piezoelectric sensor 117; p. 7:12-15 and 11:39-12:6, the piezoelectric sensor generates electrical signal upon receiving a reaction force to the piezoelectric actuator. A control unit 330 is connected to each operation unit to control functions, thus it receives the signal of the piezoelectric sensor. Koike’s system is not a CMP system, but Koike teaches ordinary function of a piezoelectric element that it not only receives voltage to generate force, but also generates voltage signal induced by the detected force).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the wafer polishing system of Weber as modified by Riyuu to provide the control unit for receiving signals generated by the piezoelectric actuators as taught by Koike. Koike’s piezoelectrical element generates signals in response to force applied to the piezoelectrical actuator. It helps the controller to identify how much force is applied to a system.
Weber as modified by Riyuu and Koike does not disclose the plurality of piezoelectric actuators provides the mechanical forces according to one or more voltages being received, wherein the plurality of first piezoelectric actuators is connected to a first voltage, and the plurality of second piezoelectric actuators is connected to a second voltage different from the first voltage.
Nakagawa teaches, in an analogous grinding apparatus field of endeavor, the plurality of piezoelectric actuators provides the mechanical forces according to one or more voltages being received, wherein the plurality of first piezoelectric actuators is connected to a first voltage, and the plurality of second piezoelectric actuators is connected to a second voltage different from the first voltage (p. 8:18-22, a control device controls a plurality of piezoelectric actuators 401-412. The control device can provide different voltages simultaneously to different piezoelectric actuators. It means the first piezoelectric actuators can receive a single voltage that may be the different voltage to the second piezoelectric actuators).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the wafer polishing head of Weber as modified by Riyuu and Koike to provide the different voltages to different piezoelectric actuators as taught by Nakagawa so that it can provide different vibrations to different areas of a workpiece (Nakagawa, p. 2:26-3:3).
Regarding claim 13, Weber as modified by Riyuu, Koike, and Nakagawa teaches the wafer polishing system as in the rejection of claim 9, wherein the polishing head further comprises: a plurality of plates, disposed between the membrane and the plurality of piezoelectric actuators (Weber fig. 2, the plate elements 17a-f are disposed between the membrane 20 and the actuators 15).
Regarding claim 14, Weber as modified by Riyuu, Koike, and Nakagawa teaches the wafer polishing system as in the rejection of claim 13, wherein each of the plurality of piezoelectric actuators is disposed over a central region of each of the plurality of plates (Weber, fig. 2, each of the actuators 15 is disposed over a central region of each of the plate elements 17a-f).
Regarding claim 16, Weber as modified by Riyuu, Koike, and Nakagawa teaches the wafer polishing system as in the rejection of claim 13, wherein the plurality of plates comprises a first ring-shaped plate and a second ring-shaped plate surrounding the first ring-shaped plate (Weber figs. 2-3 and Weber English translation, p. 10:30-33, among plate elements 17a-f, a plate element 17b can be designated as the recited first ring-shaped plate and a plate element 17c can be designated as the recited second ring-shaped plate. The plate element 17c surrounds the plate element 17b), and a width of the second ring-shaped plate is less than a width of the first ring-shaped plate (Weber fig. 2, a width of the plate element 17c [corresponds to the recited second ring-shaped plate] is less than a width of the plate element 17b [corresponds to the recited first ring-shaped plate]).
Regarding claim 17, Weber as modified by Riyuu, Koike, and Nakagawa teaches the wafer polishing system as in the rejection of claim 16, wherein the first piezoelectric actuators are disposed over and coupled to the first ring-shaped plate, and the second piezoelectric actuators are disposed over and coupled to the second ring-shaped plate. (Weber figs. 2-3, the plate element 17b [correspond to the recited first ring-shaped plate] is coupled with the corresponding actuators 15 [correspond to the recited first piezoelectric actuators] and the plate element 17c [correspond to the recited second ring-shaped plate] is coupled with the corresponding actuators 15 [correspond to the recited second piezoelectric actuators]).
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weber in view of Riyuu, Koike, and Nakagawa, as applied to claim 9 above, and in further view of Large et al. (US 2002/0049029, cited on 10/27/2024 IDS, hereinafter Large).
Regarding claim 10, Weber as modified by Riyuu, Koike, and Nakagawa teaches the wafer polishing system as in the rejection of claim 9, further comprising:
a platen, configured to allow the polishing pad to be disposed thereon and rotate during a polishing operation (Weber English translation, p. 8:5-7 and fig. 1, a polishing disk 6 [corresponds to the recited platen] has the pad 4 and rotates by a drive shaft 5 during a polishing operation), but does not disclose a slurry delivery unit, configured to supply slurry onto the polishing pad during the polishing operation. Weber discloses slurry 7 on the pad, but does not disclose a slurry delivery unit.
Large teaches, in an analogous CMP field of endeavor, a slurry delivery unit, configured to supply slurry onto the polishing pad during the polishing operation (Large, fig. 1 and ¶ 0020, a liquid slurry delivery system 19 provides a liquid slurry to the polishing pad 42 to enhance the polishing process).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the wafer polishing system of Weber as modified by Riyuu, Koike, and Nakagawa to provide the slurry delivery unit as taught by Large in order to enhance the polishing process (Large ¶ 0020).
Regarding claim 11, Weber as modified by Riyuu, Koike, and Nakagawa teaches the wafer polishing system as in the rejection of claim 9, but does not disclose the one or more voltages are adjusted by the control unit according to the signal of the electrical charge generated by the plurality of piezoelectric actuators.
Large teaches, in an analogous CMP field of endeavor, the one or more voltages are adjusted by the control unit according to the signal of the electrical charge generated by the plurality of piezoelectric actuators (Large, ¶ 0037 and 0045, a CMP machine 30 may incorporate a device that measures properties of wafer including resistivity at specific locations of a wafer during the polishing process, and the amount of energy supplied to any piezoelectric element can be adjusted. Koike teaches the piezoelectric element generates the electrical signals and the control unit receives the generated signals (Koike English translation, p. 7:12-15 and 11:39-12:6). Thus, Large as modified by Koike teaches the signal generated by the piezoelectric actuators can be transmitted to the control unit, and the voltage to the piezoelectric element can be adjusted in response to the signals generated by the piezoelectric elements).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the wafer polishing system to provide the voltage adjustment so that the polishing process can be actively adjusted.
Large teaches the voltage adjustment is done by an operator (¶ 0037). However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the manual voltage adjustment to replace it by automatic voltage adjustment by a control unit in order to correct the polishing process quickly. It has been held that broadly providing an automatic or mechanical means to replace a manual activity which accomplished the same result is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art. See MPEP 2144.04(III).
Regarding claim 12, Weber as modified by Riyuu, Koike, and Nakagawa teaches the wafer polishing system as in the rejection of claim 9, but does not disclose explicitly the first piezoelectric actuators electrically isolated from the second piezoelectric actuators.
Large teaches, in an analogous CMP field of endeavor, the first piezoelectric actuators electrically isolated from the second piezoelectric actuators (Large, fig. 4A and ¶ 0036, each electrical element 62-67 is considered to be different group of piezoelectrical actuators, and each piezoelectrical element may operate independently of the others. Specification of the instant application explains, in ¶ 0046, the electrical isolation means the piezoelectrical actuators can be controlled individually).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the wafer polishing system of Weber as modified by Riyuu, Koike, and Nakagawa to provide the isolated actuators as taught by Large so that different areas of a substrate can be treated differently for optimal polishing outcome.
Claim 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weber et al. (WO 2006105785A1, hereinafter Weber), in view of Riyuu (JP H09290367A).
Regarding claim 22, Weber discloses a wafer polishing head, comprising:
a carrier head configured to hold a workpiece (figs. 1-2 and Weber English translation, p. 8:16-18, a receiving means 3 comprising a base plate 8 and a drive shaft 9 is the recited carrier head used for receiving a workpiece 1);
a first ring-shaped plate disposed in the carrier head (figs. 2-3 and Weber English translation, p. 10:30-33, actuators 15 can be arranged in ring structures. A plate element 17b can be designated as the recited first ring-shaped plate);
a second ring-shaped plate surrounding the first ring-shaped plate and disposed in the carrier head (figs. 2-3 and Weber English translation, p. 10:30-33, a plate element 17c can be designated as the recited second ring-shaped plate. The plate element 17c surrounds the plate element 17b);
a plurality of first piezoelectric actuators disposed over the first ring-shaped plate (figs. 2-3 and Weber English translation, p. 10:30-33, a plurality of actuators 15 is disposed over the plate element 17b. In case of the ring structure, the actuators are evenly distributed over the circumference; p. 11:1-3, the actuators 15 are piezoelectric elements);
a plurality of second piezoelectric actuators disposed over the second ring-shaped plate (figs. 2-3 and Weber English translation, p. 10:30-33, a plurality of actuators 15 is disposed over the plate element 17c); and
a membrane, disposed over the plurality of first piezoelectric actuators and the plurality of second piezoelectric actuators (fig. 2 and Weber English translation, p. 9:19-23, a flexible membrane 20 is disposed over the plurality of actuators 15),
wherein the first ring-shaped plate is separated from the second ring-shaped plate by a gap (fig. 2, the plate element 17b is separated from the plate element 17c by a gap), but does not disclose the membrane is configured to directly contact the workpiece during a polishing.
Riyuu teaches, in the analogous CMP field of endeavor, the membrane is configured to directly contact the workpiece during a polishing (Riyuu English translation, p. 7:5-8, 10:4-7 and figs. 3-4, a wafer polishing head 13 [corresponds to the recited carrier head] comprises piezoelectric actuators 23. A flexible carrier plate 38 and an insert 54 form the recited membrane. They are disposed underneath the actuators 23 and plates 23, and are configured to directly contact a wafer 12 [corresponds to the recited workpiece] during polishing. Weber discloses the membrane disposed between the plates. It can be modified by Riyuu to dispose the membrane below the plates to contact the workpiece directly).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the carrier head of Weber to provide the membrane to contact the workpiece directly as taught by Riyuu. It is soft enough to protect the wafer from rubbing (Riyuu English translation, p. 7:7-8).
Regarding claim 23, Weber as modified by Riyuu teaches the wafer polishing head as in the rejection of claim 22, but does not disclose a width of the gap is less than 0.02 millimeters.
Weber discloses the gap is formed between the plate elements (17a-f), but does not disclose numerical values of the gaps. However, Weber teaches notches 24 of the gaps adjacent the ring-shaped sandwich structures allow axial relative movement of the adjacent sandwich structures (Weber English translation, p. 11:26-31). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the gap of Weber as modified by Riyuu to provide its width to be less than 0.02 mm in order to allow each plate to have a room for expansion when the actuators are activated during polishing a substrate. It has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05(III).
Regarding claim 24, Weber as modified by Riyuu teaches the wafer polishing head as in the rejection of claim 22, wherein a width of the first ring-shaped plate is greater than a width of the second ring-shaped plate (Weber fig. 2, a width of the plate element 17b [corresponds to the recited first ring-shaped plate] is greater than a width of the plate element 17c [corresponds to the recited second ring-shaped plate]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 9, and 22 under 35 U.S.C. §102 and §103 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 in view of Riyuu.
Applicant argues Weber does not disclose the amended claim limitations that the membrane is configured to directly contact the workpiece during a polishing.
Examiner acknowledges the carrier head of Weber comprise the membrane 20 between the plates, thus it does not contact the workpiece directly. However, Riyuu teaches a carrier head comprising the flexible carrier plate 38 and the insert 54, which are equivalent to the recited membrane. The carrier head of Weber can be modified to have the membrane of Riyuu so that the membrane contacts the wafer 12 directly.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUKWOO JAMES CHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7402. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00a-5:00p.
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, David Posigian can be reached at (313) 446-6546. 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.
/SUKWOO JAMES CHANG/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights