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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 10/23/2025 has been entered. Claim(s) 1-20 remain pending and have been examined below. The amendment to claim 14 has overcome the objection to the claim and is hereby withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lankford (US Patent No. 6,083,085), hereinafter referred to as Lankford.
Regarding claim 1 (Currently Amended), Lankford discloses in figures 1-2 and 6, a conditioner [Lankford, fig 6, 200, and col 6, lines 45-55 teaching that the common elements of fig 6 can also be found in figs 1-2] for use in a CMP system [Lankford, abstract and fig 1, showing the system in which 200 is to be used in] comprising:
a conditioning arm [Lankford, fig 2, 120] on a polishing pad that is configured to chemically mechanically polish a substrate based on slurry [Lankford, fig 2, 40];
a conditioning disk [Lankford, fig 6, 270] on the conditioning arm that is configured to condition the polishing pad [Lankford, fig 6, 270 is attached to 120 via intermediate members and is configured to condition 40];
a dilution solution injector on a first side of the conditioning arm [Lankford, fig 6, 162 and is located on a side of 120 and includes the space between 164 and 270] and configured to inject a dilution solution to the slurry introduced into a space under the conditioning disk [Lankford, fig 6, 162 injects deionized water to within the space of 164, which includes underneath 270]; and
a sonicator on a second side of the conditioning arm [Lankford, fig 6, 150 and 152 is on a second side of 120] and configured to apply an ultrasonic wave to debris generated from the polishing pad [Lankford, col 5, lines 7-30, 150 and 152 are induced ultrasonic frequencies to remove waste matter],
wherein the dilution solution injector and the sonicator are provided on a same plane [Lankford, fig 6, 162 and 150 exist on a same plane and since the applicant has not specified where that plane lies, the plane may be in any direction so long as the two elements are connected by a line] and spaced apart from each other in a direction parallel to an upper surface of the polishing pad [Lankford, fig 6, since 162 and 150 are separate elements and are not integral to each other, meaning that the elements can be disassembled, and since the applicant has not claimed how much space is between the elements, the BRI is that there exists space between the elements].
Regarding claims 2-4 (Original), Lankford further discloses the conditioner of claim 1, wherein the first side of the conditioning arm is a front portion of the conditioning arm oriented in a direction opposite to a rotation direction of the polishing pad [Lankford, fig 6, 162 and the space between 270 and 164 can surround the entire circumference of 270 such that 162 is on the side that is opposite the rotation direction of the polishing pad] (clm 2);
wherein the dilution solution injector has a shape to surround the front portion of the conditioning arm [Lankford, fig 6, 162 and the space between 164 and 270 surrounds the entire circumference of 270 such that 162 surrounds the front portion of 120] (clm 3); and
wherein the dilution solution injector has a semi- ring shape [Lankford, fig 6, 162 and the space between 164 and 270 surrounds the entire circumference of 270 such that 162 and includes a semi-ring shape] (clm 4).
Regarding claim 5 (Original), Lankford further discloses the conditioner of claim 1, wherein the dilution solution comprises deionized (DI) water [Lankford, col 5, lines 50-53, 162 uses deionized water].
Regarding claims 6-9 (Original), Lankford further discloses the conditioner of claim 1, wherein the second side of the conditioning arm is a rear portion of the conditioning arm oriented in a rotation direction of the polishing pad [Lankford, fig 6, 162 and the space between 270 and 164 can surround the entire circumference of 270 and that at least one of 150 is on the side that is in the rotation direction of the polishing pad] (clm 6);
wherein the sonicator has a shape to surround the rear portion of the conditioning arm [Lankford, fig 6, the space between 270 and 164 can surround the entire circumference of 270 and that at least one of 150 and 152 are on the side that is in the rotation direction of the polishing pad and by providing ultrasonic frequencies to 168, 150 and 152 surrounds the rear portion] (clm 7);
wherein the sonicator has a semi-ring shape [Lankford, fig 6, 162 and the space between 270 and 164 can surround the entire circumference of 270 and that at least one of 150 and 152 are in a semi-ring shape] (clm 8); and
wherein the sonicator comprises an arm that is configured to rotate the sonicator with respect to a vertical axis [Lankford, fig 6, 161 rotates 150 through intermediate members about a vertical axis] (clm 9).
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.
Claims 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lankford (US Patent No. 6,083,085) in view of Wu et al (US PGPUB No. 2023/0390895), hereinafter referred to as Lankford and Wu, respectively.
Regarding claims 10-11 (Original), 12 (Currently amended), 13 (Original), 14 (Currently amended), 15-16 (Original), 17 (Currently amended), and 18-20 (Original), Lankford discloses in figures 1-2 and 6, a conditioner [Lankford, fig 6, 200, and col 6, lines 45-55 teaching that the common elements of fig 6 can also be found in figs 1-2] for use in a CMP system [Lankford, abstract and fig 1, showing the system in which 200 is to be used in] comprising:
a conditioning arm [Lankford, fig 2, 120] on a polishing pad that is configured to chemically mechanically polish a substrate based on slurry [Lankford, fig 2, 40];
a conditioning disk [Lankford, fig 6, 270] on the conditioning arm that is configured to condition the polishing pad [Lankford, fig 6, 270 is attached to 120 via intermediate members and is configured to condition 40];
a dilution solution injector on a first side of the conditioning arm [Lankford, fig 6, 162 and is located on a side of 120 and includes the space between 164 and 270] and having a semi-ring shape [Lankford, fig 6, 162 and the space between 164 and 270 surrounds the entire circumference of 270 such that 162 and includes a semi-ring shape] and adjacent to the front portion of the conditioning arm oriented in a direction opposite to a rotation direction of the polishing pad [Lankford, fig 6, 162 and the space between 270 and 164 can surround the entire circumference of 270 such that 162 is on the side that is opposite the rotation direction of the polishing pad] (clm 12) (clm 13) (clm 18), and configured to inject a dilution solution to the slurry introduced into a space under the conditioning disk [Lankford, fig 6, 162 injects deionized water to within the space of 164, which includes underneath 270]; and
a sonicator on a second side of the conditioning arm [Lankford, fig 6, 150 and 152 is on a second side of 120] having a semi-ring shape [Lankford, fig 6, 162 and the space between 270 and 164 can surround the entire circumference of 270 and that at least one of 150 and 152 are in a semi-ring shape] and adjacent to a rear portion of the conditioning arm opposite to the front portion [Lankford, fig 6, 162 and the space between 270 and 164 can surround the entire circumference of 270 and that at least one of 150 is on the side that is in the rotation direction of the polishing pad] (clm 12) (clm 14) (clm 19) and configured to apply an ultrasonic wave to debris generated from the polishing pad [Lankford, col 5, lines 7-30, 150 and 152 are induced ultrasonic frequencies to remove waste matter], wherein the sonicator comprises an arm configured to rotate the sonicator with respect to a vertical axis [Lankford, fig 6, 161 rotates 150 through intermediate members about a vertical axis] (clm 15),
wherein the dilution solution injector and the sonicator are provided on a same plane [Lankford, fig 6, 162 and 150 exist on a same plane and since the applicant has not specified where that plane lies, the plane may be in any direction so long as the two elements are connected by a line] and spaced apart from each other in a direction parallel to an upper surface of the polishing pad [Lankford, fig 6, since 162 and 150 are separate elements and are not integral to each other, meaning that the elements can be disassembled, and since the applicant has not claimed how much space is between the elements, the BRI is that there exists space between the elements] (clm 12) (clm 17).
Lankford does not explicitly disclose a chemical mechanical polishing (CMP) apparatus comprising:
a polishing head configured to hold a substrate;
a platen under the polishing head;
a polishing pad on the platen and configured to chemically mechanically polish the substrate;
a slurry arm configured to supply slurry to the polishing pad (clm 17); and
a cleaner configured to clean the sonicator (clm 10) (clm 12) (clm 20), wherein the cleaner comprises a brush (clm 11) (clm 16).
Wu teaches a chemical mechanical polishing (CMP) apparatus [Wu, fig 1] comprising:
a polishing head configured to hold a substrate [Wu, fig 1, 70 holds W];
a platen under the polishing head [Wu, fig 1, 24, under 70];
a polishing pad on the platen and configured to chemically mechanically polish the substrate [Wu, fig 1, 30 on 24 and polishes W];
a slurry arm configured to supply slurry to the polishing pad [Wu, fig 2, 62] (clm 17);
a conditioner configured to condition the polishing pad [Wu, fig 1, 40 conditions 30]; and
a cleaner configured to clean the conditioner [Wu, fig 2, 100] (clm 10) (clm 12) (clm 20), wherein the cleaner comprises a brush [Wu, page 2, pp 0028, 100 includes brush 110] (clm 11) (clm 16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used conditioner of Lankford in the CMP system of Wu, which includes the conditioner cleaner apparatus and brush, because per MPEP 2143(I)(A) it has been held that the combination of old elements operating in the same fashion is obvious over the prior art. Where in the instant case, to include the CMP apparatus and conditioner cleaner as taught by Wu in the system of Lankford, each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references. The only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the CMP apparatus and conditioner cleaner as taught by Wu in the system of Lankford because the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, the elements being CMP apparatus including the conditioner cleaner of Wu and the conditioner of Lankford. In the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination gave the predictable result that the conditioner of Lankford would operate the same in the system of Wu, and that the conditioner cleaner would clean the whole conditioning head of Lankford, which includes the sonicator, in the same fashion as Wu.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/23/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant has argued on page 9 that Lankford under the 102 and 103 rejections does not teach the amended claim limitation of “wherein the dilution solution injector and the sonicator are provided on a same plane and spaced apart from each other in a direction parallel to an upper surface of the polishing pad”. Respectfully the Office disagrees because the applicant has not defined the plane that other with the two elements, so the plane may be at an angle with respect to the surface of the conditioner and further may be at any length in the Z axis. Further the Applicant has not claimed how much of a space is between the two elements, and since the 162 and 150 are separate elements and are not integral to each other, meaning that the elements can be disassembled, and since the applicant has not claimed how much space is between the elements, the BRI is that there exists space between the elements Therefore the rejection is maintained. Should the Applicant further define and claim the plane and further define and claim the space between the sonicator and the dilution solution injector, further search and consideration will be required of such an amendment.
Conclusion
Elledge et al (US Patent No. 6,872,132) teaches in figure 5 a fluid arm [390] to dispense fluid and transducers [170] being spaced apart from in other in a vertical plane.
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 ROBERT NEIBAUR whose telephone number is (571)270-7979. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 8:00 am - 5:00 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 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.
/ROBERT F NEIBAUR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723