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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
1. The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/18/2023, 12/22/2023, 8/15/2024, 11/4/2024 and 11/17/2025 were filed prior to the mailing date of this action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
2. Claims 3, 10 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3, “a controller and is configured to measure a polishing rate near an edge of a substrate” should read “[[a]] the controller and is configured to measure a polishing rate near an edge of [[a]] the substrate” to avoid the antecedent basis issue.
Claim 10, “edge of a substrate” should read “edge of [[a]] the substrate” to avoid the antecedent basis issue.
Claim 15, line 5, “across a surface of the pad” should read “across [[a]] the surface of the pad” to avoid the antecedent basis issue.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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.
Claims 1-2 and 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kiesel et al. (US PGPUB 20080132152), hereinafter Kiesel.
Regarding claim 1, Kiesel teaches an apparatus for processing a substrate (fig. 3), comprising:
a pad (fig. 3, pad 102) disposed on a platen (platen 101), wherein the pad has a pad radius and a central axis from which the pad radius extends (fig. 3);
a carrier assembly (polishing head 104) configured to be disposed on a surface of the pad (fig. 3) and having a carrier radius that extends from a rotational axis of the carrier assembly (fig. 3, [0031]), wherein the rotational axis is disposed at a first radial distance from the central axis (fig. 3);
a first fluid delivery arm (see annotated fig. 3 below, [0056-0057]) having a first nozzle (outlet 109 of the first fluid delivery arm, as shown in fig. 2) configured to provide a first fluid to a first point on the pad at a second radial distance from the central axis (the outlet of the first fluid delivery arm is configured to provide a first fluid to a first point on the pad at a second radial distance from the central axis due to the linearly movable slurry distribution device as further detailed in fig. 2 [0056-0057]);
PNG
media_image1.png
447
771
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a second fluid delivery arm (see annotated fig. 3 above, [0056-0057]) having a second nozzle (outlet 109 of the second fluid delivery arm, as shown in fig. 2) configured to provide a second fluid [0055] to a second point on the pad, the second point disposed a third radial distance from the central axis (the outlet of the second fluid delivery arm is configured to provide a second fluid to a second point on the pad, the second point disposed a third radial distance from the central axis due to the linearly movable slurry distribution device as further detailed in fig. 2 [0056-0057]); and
a controller (control unit 125) adapted to cause movement of the second fluid delivery arm to control a radial entry point of the second fluid under the carrier assembly (paragraph 0060, wherein Kiesel teaches the movement of the slurry outlets can be controlled and changed automatically depending on process conditions such as inline wafer removal profile measurement, even slurry distribution over platen radius or wafer diameter, minimizing slurry consumption, and reducing defects due to uneven slurry distribution over wafer area).
Regarding claim 2, Kiesel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Kiesel teaches a first actuator (drive assembly 105) that is configured to cause the carrier assembly to translate across a surface of the pad such that the first radial distance varies between a first radial value and a second radial value as the carrier assembly is translated across the surface of the pad [0031]; and
a second actuator (linear drive assembly 220) that is configured to cause the second fluid delivery arm (fig. 3) to translate over the surface of the pad (fig. 2-3, [0053]) such that the third radial distance varies between a third radial value and a fourth radial value as the second fluid delivery arm is translated over the surface of the pad (fig. 2-3, [0053]),
wherein the fourth radial value is greater than the first radial value or the second radial value (fig. 2-3, [0053 and 0060], the fourth radial value of the position of the second fluid deliver arm is greater than the first radial value. That is, the outermost position of the second fluid delivery arm is greater than an inner most position of the carrier assembly).
Regarding claim 4, Kiesel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Kiesel teaches wherein the second radial distance is less than the first radial distance (fig. 2-3), and the third radial distance is greater than or equal to the second radial distance (fig. 2-3, [0053], the second nozzle is movable such that the third radial distance is greater than or equal to the second radial distance).
Regarding claim 5, Kiesel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Kiesel teaches wherein a magnitude of the third radial distance is less than a fourth radial distance that extends from the central axis to an outer most point on the carrier assembly (fig. 2, additionally, the second nozzle is movable such that a magnitude of the third radial distance is less than a fourth radial distance that extends from the central axis to an outer most point on the carrier assembly [0053]).
Regarding claim 6, Kiesel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Kiesel teaches wherein the first fluid delivery arm overlaps an entirety of a radial position occupied by the carrier assembly over the pad (fig. 2-3).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiesel et al. (US PGPUB 20080132152), hereinafter Kiesel, in view of Kimba (US PGPUB 20120019830).
Regarding claim 3, Kiesel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 2.
Kiesel does not explicitly teach further comprising a metrology unit disposed within the platen comprising a window disposed through the pad and a measurement unit, wherein the measurement unit is connected to a controller and is configured to measure a polishing rate near an edge of a substrate.
However, Kimba teaches a method of monitoring progress of substrate polishing and a polishing apparatus comprising a metrology unit (fig. 8) disposed within the platen (fig. 8) comprising a window disposed through the pad (fig. 8, through hole 31) and a measurement unit (fig. 8, structures 13, 14 and other associated structures), wherein the measurement unit is connected to a controller (fig. 8, processor 15) and is configured to measure a polishing rate near an edge of a substrate ([0057], the polishing rate is calculated from the initial film thickness, the last film thickness and the polishing time that are obtained by actual measurement).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kiesel to incorporate the teachings of Kimba to provide comprising a metrology unit disposed within the platen comprising a window disposed through the pad and a measurement unit, wherein the measurement unit is connected to a controller and is configured to measure a polishing rate near an edge of a substrate. Specifically, it would have been obvious to incorporate the sensor teachings of Kimba to provide a sensor disposed within the platen of Kiesel which comprises a window through the pad of Kiesel and a measurement unit, wherein the measurement unit is connected to the controller of Kiesel and is configured to measure a polishing rate near an edge of a substrate. Doing so would promote quality of the workpiece by preventing over polishing of the workpiece. Additionally, doing so would aid in identifying an endpoint of the processing.
Claims 7-9 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiesel et al. (US PGPUB 20080132152), hereinafter Kiesel, in view of Huang et al. (US PGPUB 20190054590), hereinafter Huang.
Regarding claim 7, Kiesel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Kiesel does not explicitly teach wherein the second fluid delivery arm extends over less than 60% of the pad radius.
However, Huang teaches a chemical mechanical planarization system including a first fluid delivery arm (conduit 118, fig. 1b) and a second fluid delivery arm (conduit 128, fig. 1b), wherein the second fluid delivery arm (conduit 128) extends over less than 60% of the pad radius (fig. 1b, pad 114).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kiesel to incorporate the teachings of Huang to provide wherein the second fluid delivery arm extends over less than 60% of the pad radius. Specifically, it would have been obvious to incorporate the teachings of Huang such that the second fluid delivery arm of Kiesel extends over less than 60% of the pad radius. Doing so would have been a simple substitution (MPEP 2143) of one known fluid delivery arm for another known fluid delivery arm to obtain the predictable results of providing fluid to a polishing operation.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Kiesel, as modified, to include wherein the second fluid delivery arm extends over less than 60% of the pad radius since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of Kiesel, as modified, would not operate differently with the claimed extension since the second fluid delivery arm would continue to be capable of delivering fluid to the polishing operation. Further, it appears the applicant places no criticality on the claimed range.
Regarding claim 8, Kiesel, as modified, teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 7. Kiesel, as modified, does not explicitly teach wherein the second fluid delivery arm comprises:
a fluid source; and
a temperature control unit fluidly coupled to the fluid source and the second fluid delivery arm.
However, Huang additionally teaches wherein the second fluid delivery arm comprises:
a fluid source (reservoir 120, fig. 1a); and
a temperature control unit fluidly coupled to the fluid source and the second fluid delivery arm (controller 150, [0026], fig. 1a).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Kiesel, as modified, to incorporate the additional teachings of Huang to provide wherein the second fluid delivery arm comprises: a fluid source; and a temperature control unit fluidly coupled to the fluid source and the second fluid delivery arm.
Specifically, it would have been obvious to incorporate the fluid source and temperature control unit of Huang. Doing so would allow the temperature of the fluid to be controlled, which aids in controlling the polishing rate [0004 of Huang] in order to promote quality of the workpiece.
Regarding claim 9, Kiesel teaches an apparatus for processing a substrate (fig. 3), comprising:
a platen (platen 101);
a pad (fig. 3, pad 102) disposed on the platen (platen 101, figs. 2-3), the pad having a pad radius extending from a central axis (fig. 3);
a carrier assembly (polishing head 104) disposed on the pad having (fig. 3) a carrier radius that extends from a rotational axis of the carrier assembly (fig. 3, [0031]);
a first fluid delivery arm (see annotated fig. 3 below, [0056-0057]) extending over at least 50% of the pad radius (fig. 3) and configured to provide a first fluid to a first point on the pad (the outlet of the first fluid delivery arm is configured to provide a first fluid to a first point on the pad due to the linearly movable slurry distribution device as further detailed in fig. 2 [0056-0057]);
PNG
media_image1.png
447
771
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a second fluid delivery arm (see annotated fig. 3 above, [0056-0057]), the second fluid delivery arm configured to provide a second fluid to a second point on the pad (the outlet of the second fluid delivery arm is configured to provide a second fluid to a second point on the pad due to the linearly movable slurry distribution device as further detailed in fig. 2 [0056-0057]), the second point disposed a radial distance from the central axis (fig. 2-3), the radial distance being greater than about 40% of the pad radius ([0056-0057], the second fluid delivery arm is configured to provide a second fluid to a second point which is disposed a radial distance from the central axis, wherein the radial distance is greater than about 40% of the pad radius (fig. 3) due to the linearly movable slurry distribution device as further detailed in fig. 2 [0056-0057]); and
a controller (control unit 125) adapted to cause movement of the second fluid delivery arm to control a distance between the second point on the pad and the carrier assembly (paragraphs 0060 and 0056-0057, wherein Kiesel teaches the movement of the slurry outlets can be controlled and changed automatically depending on process conditions such as inline wafer removal profile measurement, even slurry distribution over platen radius or wafer diameter, minimizing slurry consumption, and reducing defects due to uneven slurry distribution over wafer area).
Kiesel does not explicitly teach a second fluid delivery arm extending over less than 60% of the pad radius.
However, Huang teaches a chemical mechanical planarization system including a first fluid delivery arm (conduit 118, fig. 1b) and a second fluid delivery arm (conduit 128, fig. 1b), wherein the second fluid delivery arm (conduit 128) extends over less than 60% of the pad radius (fig. 1b, pad 114).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kiesel to incorporate the teachings of Huang to provide wherein the second fluid delivery arm extends over less than 60% of the pad radius. Specifically, it would have been obvious to incorporate the teachings of Huang such that the second fluid delivery arm of Kiesel extends over less than 60% of the pad radius. Doing so would have been a simple substitution (MPEP 2143) of one known fluid delivery arm for another known fluid delivery arm to obtain the predictable results of providing fluid to a polishing operation.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Kiesel, as modified, to include wherein the second fluid delivery arm extends over less than 60% of the pad radius since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of Kiesel, as modified, would not operate differently with the claimed extension since the second fluid delivery arm would continue to be capable of delivering fluid to the polishing operation. Further, it appears the applicant places no criticality on the claimed range.
Regarding claim 14, Kiesel, as modified, teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 9. Additionally, Kiesel, as modified, teaches wherein the carrier assembly is disposed a distance of at least 10% of a total radius of the pad from a center of the pad and no more than 90% of the total radius of the pad from the center of the pad (fig. 3).
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Kiesel, as modified, to include wherein the carrier assembly is disposed a distance of at least 10% of a total radius of the pad from a center of the pad and no more than 90% of the total radius of the pad from the center of the pad since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of Kiesel, as modified, would not operate differently with the claimed ratio since the carrier assembly would continue to be able to process the workpiece. Further, it appears the applicant places no criticality on the claimed range.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiesel et al. (US PGPUB 20080132152), hereinafter Kiesel, in view of Huang et al. (US PGPUB 20190054590), hereinafter Huang, as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Kimba (US PGPUB 20120019830).
Regarding claim 10, Kiesel, as modified, teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 9.
Kiesel, as modified, does not explicitly teach a metrology unit connected to the controller and configured to measure a polishing rate near an edge of a substrate.
However, Kimba teaches a method of monitoring progress of substrate polishing and a polishing apparatus comprising a metrology unit (fig. 8) connected to the controller (fig. 8, processor 15) and configured to measure a polishing rate near an edge of a substrate ([0057], the polishing rate is calculated from the initial film thickness, the last film thickness and the polishing time that are obtained by actual measurement).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kiesel, as modified, to incorporate the teachings of Kimba to provide a metrology unit connected to the controller and configured to measure a polishing rate near an edge of a substrate.
Specifically, it would have been obvious to incorporate the sensor teachings of Kimba to provide a sensor disposed within the platen of Kiesel which comprises a window through the pad of Kiesel and a measurement unit, wherein the measurement unit is connected to the controller of Kiesel and is configured to measure a polishing rate near an edge of a substrate. Doing so would promote quality of the workpiece by preventing over polishing of the workpiece. Additionally, doing so would aid in identifying an endpoint of the processing.
Claims 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiesel et al. (US PGPUB 20080132152), hereinafter Kiesel, in view of Huang et al. (US PGPUB 20190054590), hereinafter Huang, as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Chen (US PGPUB 20120171933).
Regarding claim 11, Kiesel, as modified, teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 9. Additionally, Kiesel, as modified, teaches wherein the second fluid delivery arm comprises:
a swivel actuator ([0055-0056], rotational drive assembly 214, fig. 2);
an extension member extending over the pad (fig. 2-3, structure indicated by element 220); and
a nozzle coupled to the extension member and disposed over the pad (fig. 2-3, outlet 109 of the second fluid delivery arm is coupled to the extension member and disposed over the pad).
Kiesel, as modified, does not explicitly teach a base plate and a swivel actuator coupled to the base plate.
However, Chen teaches a pressure controlled polishing platen wherein the fluid applicator arm 155 is adapted to rotate about axis C (fig. 1) and wherein the applicator arm 155 is connected to a base plate 110 (fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Kiesel, as modified, to incorporate the teachings of Chen to provide a base plate and the swivel actuator coupled to the base plate. Specifically, it would have been obvious to incorporate a base plate as taught by Chen, wherein the second fluid delivery arm and swivel actuator are coupled to the base plate. Doing so would properly mount the fluid delivery arm and allow it to operate as intended. Additionally, doing so would increase the rigidity of the device which promotes longevity.
Regarding claim 12, Kiesel, as modified, teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 11. Additionally, Kiesel, as modified, teaches wherein the first fluid delivery arm overlaps an entirety of a radial position occupied by the carrier assembly over the pad (fig. 2-3 of Kiesel).
Regarding claim 13, Kiesel, as modified, teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 11. Kiesel, as modified, does not explicitly teach a fluid source; and
a temperature control unit fluidly coupled to the fluid source and the second fluid delivery arm.
However, Huang additionally teaches a fluid source (reservoir 120, fig. 1a); and
a temperature control unit fluidly coupled to the fluid source and the second fluid delivery arm (controller 150, [0026], fig. 1a).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Kiesel, as modified, to incorporate the additional teachings of Huang to provide a fluid source; and a temperature control unit fluidly coupled to the fluid source and the second fluid delivery arm.
Specifically, it would have been obvious to incorporate the fluid source and temperature control unit of Huang. Doing so would allow the temperature of the fluid to be controlled, which aids in controlling the polishing rate [0004 of Huang] in order to promote quality of the workpiece.
Claims 15-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiesel et al. (US PGPUB 20080132152), hereinafter Kiesel, in view of Lin et al. (US PGPUB 20180286699), hereinafter Lin.
Regarding claim 15, Kiesel teaches a method of polishing a substrate (fig. 2-3) comprising:
urging a substrate (fig. 2, substrate 107) against a surface of a pad (pad 102) of a polishing system using a carrier assembly (fig. 3, polishing head 104), wherein the pad has a pad radius and a central axis from which the pad radius extends (fig. 3);
translating the carrier assembly across a surface of the pad while rotating the carrier assembly about a rotational axis (fig. 3, [0031], wherein drive assembly 105 translates the polishing head and rotates the polishing head);
dispensing a first fluid onto the pad from a first fluid delivery arm (see annotated fig. 3 below, [0056-0057]) at a first temperature and a first flow rate (the first fluid delivery arm dispenses a fluid onto the pad. Therefore, the dispensed fluid has a first temperature and a first flow rate), wherein the first fluid is delivered to the pad at a second radial distance that is measured from the central axis (the outlet of the first fluid delivery arm is configured to provide a first fluid at a second radial distance from the central axis due to the linearly movable slurry distribution device as further detailed in fig. 2 [0056-0057]);
PNG
media_image1.png
447
771
media_image1.png
Greyscale
dispensing a second fluid onto the pad from a second fluid delivery arm (see annotated fig. 3 above, [0056-0057]) at a second flow rate and at a second temperature (the second fluid delivery arm dispenses a fluid onto the pad. Therefore, the dispensed fluid has a second temperature and a second flow rate), wherein the second fluid delivery arm dispenses the second fluid at a third radial distance measured from the central axis that is greater than the second radial distance (the outlet of the second fluid delivery arm is configured to provide a second fluid at a third radial distance measured from the central axis that is greater than the second radial distance due to the linearly movable slurry distribution device as further detailed in fig. 2 [0056-0057]);
moving the second fluid delivery arm to control a radial entry point of the second fluid under the carrier assembly (paragraph 0060, wherein Kiesel teaches the movement of the slurry outlets can be controlled and changed automatically depending on process conditions such as inline wafer removal profile measurement, even slurry distribution over platen radius or wafer diameter, minimizing slurry consumption, and reducing defects due to uneven slurry distribution over wafer area).
Kiesel does not explicitly teach
stopping the dispensing of the second fluid; and
stopping the dispensing of the first fluid.
However, Lin teaches a polishing process of a semiconductor device wherein when the polishing of the wafer is finished, the supply assembly of the slurry arm is tuned off and the dispensing nozzle stops supplying the slurry on the polishing pad [0055]. Overall, Lin teaches stopping the dispensing of the fluid after polishing.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kiesel to incorporate the teachings of Lin to provide stopping the dispensing of the second fluid; and stopping the dispensing of the first fluid. Specifically, it would have been obvious to stop the dispensing of both fluids after the polishing is compete. Doing so would prevent waste of the polishing fluid when the workpiece is not being polished. Additionally, doing so would conserve the polishing fluid.
Regarding claim 16, Kiesel, as modified, teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 15. Additionally, Kiesel, as modified, teaches wherein the first fluid and the second fluid are different [0055 of Kiesel].
Regarding claim 17, Kiesel, as modified, teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 15. Additionally, Kiesel, as modified, teaches wherein a magnitude of the third radial distance is less than a fourth radial distance that extends from the central axis to an outer most point on the carrier assembly (fig. 2 of Kiesel, additionally, the second nozzle is movable such that a magnitude of the third radial distance is less than a fourth radial distance that extends from the central axis to an outer most point on the carrier assembly [0053 and 0060]).
Regarding claim 19, Kiesel, as modified, teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 15. Additionally, Kiesel, as modified, teaches wherein the second fluid is dispensed onto the pad at a radial position outward from an innermost edge of the carrier assembly with respect to the central axis of the pad, but inward from an outermost edge of the carrier assembly with respect to the central axis of the pad (fig. 2 of Kiesel, additionally, the second nozzle is movable such that the second fluid is dispensed onto the pad at a radial position outward from an innermost edge of the carrier assembly with respect to the central axis of the pad, but inward from an outermost edge of the carrier assembly with respect to the central axis of the pad due to the movement of the slurry outlets being controlled to achieve even slurry distribution over wafer diameter [0053 and 0060]).
Regarding claim 20, Kiesel, as modified, teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 15. Additionally, Kiesel, as modified, teaches wherein the second fluid delivery arm moves so the second fluid intersects a same portion of the carrier assembly while the carrier assembly is translated across the surface of the pad (fig. 2 of Kiesel, additionally, the second nozzle is moved such that the second fluid delivery arm moves so the second fluid intersects a same portion of the carrier assembly while the carrier assembly is translated across the surface of the pad due to the movement of the slurry outlets being controlled to achieve even slurry distribution over wafer diameter [0053 and 0060], wherein even slurry distribution over wafer diameter is interpreted as intersecting a same portion of the carrier assembly while the carrier assembly is translated).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiesel et al. (US PGPUB 20080132152), hereinafter Kiesel, in view of Lin et al. (US PGPUB 20180286699), hereinafter Lin, as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Huang et al. (US PGPUB 20190054590), hereinafter Huang.
Regarding claim 18, Kiesel, as modified, teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 15. Kiesel, as modified, does not explicitly teach wherein a temperature of the second fluid is controlled by a temperature control unit to adjust a polishing rate.
However, Huang teaches a chemical mechanical planarization system including a first fluid delivery arm (conduit 118, fig. 1b) and a second fluid delivery arm (conduit 128, fig. 1b), wherein a temperature of the second fluid is controlled by a temperature control unit to adjust a polishing rate (controller 150, [0026 and 0004], fig. 1a).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Kiesel, as modified, to incorporate the teachings of Huang to provide wherein a temperature of the second fluid is controlled by a temperature control unit to adjust a polishing rate.
Specifically, it would have been obvious to incorporate the fluid source and temperature control unit of Huang. Doing so would allow the temperature of the fluid to be controlled, which aids in controlling the polishing rate [0004 of Huang] in order to promote quality of the workpiece.
Double Patenting
5. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1 and 9 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2 are 4 of copending Application No. 18/401,306 in view of Kiesel et al. (US PGPUB 20080132152), hereinafter Kiesel, and further in view of Huang et al. (US PGPUB 20190054590), hereinafter Huang.
Instant Application 18/215,267
Copending Application 18/401,306
An apparatus for processing a substrate, comprising:
1. An apparatus for processing a substrate, comprising:
a pad disposed on a platen, wherein the pad has a pad radius and a central axis from which the pad radius extends;
a pad disposed on a platen, wherein the pad has a pad radius and a central axis from which the pad radius extends;
a carrier assembly configured to be disposed on a surface of the pad and having a carrier radius that extends from a rotational axis of the carrier assembly, wherein the rotational axis is disposed at a first radial distance from the central axis;
a carrier assembly configured to be disposed on a surface of the pad and having a carrier radius that extends from a rotational axis of the carrier assembly, wherein the rotational axis is disposed at a first radial distance from the central axis;
a first fluid delivery arm having a first nozzle configured to provide a first fluid to a first point on the pad at a second radial distance from the central axis;
a first fluid delivery arm having a first nozzle configured to provide a first fluid to a first point on a surface of the pad at a second radial distance from the central axis;
a second fluid delivery arm having a second nozzle configured to provide a second fluid to a second point on the pad, the second point disposed a third radial distance from the central axis; and
and a second nozzle configured to provide a second fluid to a second point on the surface of the pad, the second point disposed a third radial distance from the central axis, wherein the third radial distance is greater than or equal to the first radial distance and the second radial distance.
2. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the second nozzle is positioned on a second fluid delivery arm that is positionable over a portion of the surface of the pad.
a controller adapted to cause movement of the second fluid delivery arm to control a radial entry point of the second fluid under the carrier assembly.
9. An apparatus for processing a substrate, comprising:
4. An apparatus for processing a substrate, comprising:
a platen;
a platen;
a pad disposed on the platen, the pad having a pad radius extending from a central axis;
a pad disposed on the platen, the pad having a pad radius extending from a central axis;
a carrier assembly disposed on the pad having a carrier radius that extends from a rotational axis of the carrier assembly;
a carrier assembly disposed on the pad having a carrier radius that extends from a rotational axis of the carrier assembly;
a first fluid delivery arm configured to provide a first fluid to a first point on the pad;
a first fluid delivery arm configured to provide a first fluid to a first point on the pad;
a second fluid delivery arm configured to provide a second fluid to a second point on the pad, the second point disposed a radial distance from the central axis, the radial distance being greater than about 40% of the pad radius; and
and a second fluid delivery arm configured to provide a second fluid to a second point on the pad, the second point disposed a radial distance from the central axis, the radial distance being greater than about 75% of the pad radius.
a controller adapted to cause movement of the second fluid delivery arm to control a distance between the second point on the pad and the carrier assembly.
Claims 1-2 and 4 of the copending application do not explicitly teach
a controller adapted to cause movement of the second fluid delivery arm to control a radial entry point of the second fluid under the carrier assembly and to control a distance between the second point on the pad and the carrier assembly;
a first fluid delivery arm extending over at least 50% of the pad radius
a second fluid delivery arm extending over less than 60% of the pad radius.
However, Kiesel teaches a system for controlling chemical mechanical polishing including
a controller (125) adapted to cause movement of the second fluid delivery arm to control a radial entry point of the second fluid under the carrier assembly (paragraph 0060, wherein Kiesel teaches the movement of the slurry outlets can be controlled and changed automatically depending on process conditions such as inline wafer removal profile measurement, even slurry distribution over platen radius or wafer diameter, minimizing slurry consumption, and reducing defects due to uneven slurry distribution over wafer area) and to control a distance between the second point on the pad and the carrier assembly (paragraphs 0060 and 0056-0057, wherein Kiesel teaches the movement of the slurry outlets can be controlled and changed automatically depending on process conditions such as inline wafer removal profile measurement, even slurry distribution over platen radius or wafer diameter, minimizing slurry consumption, and reducing defects due to uneven slurry distribution over wafer area);
a first fluid delivery arm extending over at least 50% of the pad radius (fig. 3, wherein a first fluid delivery arm extends over at least 50 % of the pad radius).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified claims 1-2 and 4 of the copending application to incorporate the teachings of Kiesel to provide a controller adapted to cause movement of the second fluid delivery arm to control a radial entry point of the second fluid under the carrier assembly and to control a distance between the second point on the pad and the carrier assembly;
a first fluid delivery arm extending over at least 50% of the pad radius.
Specifically, it would have been obvious to incorporate the controller and functions of the controller as taught by Kiesel and wherein the first fluid delivery arm extends over at least 50% of the pad radius. Incorporating the controller would promote even distribution of the fluid over the wafer diameter [0060 of Kiesel] which promotes quality of the workpiece. Additionally, incorporating wherein the first fluid delivery arm extends over at least 50% of the pad radius allows the first fluid delivery arm to dispense fluid across the entire pad which promotes quality of the workpiece.
Claims 1-2 and 4, as modified, of the copending application do not explicitly teach
a second fluid delivery arm extending over less than 60% of the pad radius.
However, Huang teaches a chemical mechanical planarization system wherein a second fluid delivery arm (128 of fig. 1b) extends over less than 60% of the pad radius.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified claims 1-2 and 4, as modified, of the copending application to incorporate the teachings of Huang to provide the second fluid delivery arm extending over less than 60% of the pad radius.
Specifically, it would have been obvious to modify the second fluid delivery arm such that it extends over less than 60% of the pad radius. Doing so would provide less moving parts which decreases maintenance requirements. Additionally, doing so would continue to allow the fluid delivery arm to deliver fluid to the pad.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claims 1-14 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-13 of U.S. Patent No. 11724355 in view of Kiesel et al. (US PGPUB 20080132152), hereinafter Kiesel.
Instant Application 18/215,267
US Patent 11724355
An apparatus for processing a substrate, comprising:
1. An apparatus for processing a substrate, comprising:
a pad disposed on a platen, wherein the pad has a pad radius and a central axis from which the pad radius extends;
a pad disposed on a platen, wherein the pad has a pad radius and a central axis from which the pad radius extends;
a carrier assembly configured to be disposed on a surface of the pad and having a carrier radius that extends from a rotational axis of the carrier assembly, wherein the rotational axis is disposed at a first radial distance from the central axis;
a carrier assembly configured to be disposed on a surface of the pad and having a carrier radius that extends from a rotational axis of the carrier assembly, wherein the rotational axis is disposed at a first radial distance from the central axis;
a first fluid delivery arm having a first nozzle configured to provide a first fluid to a first point on the pad at a second radial distance from the central axis;
a first fluid delivery arm having a first nozzle configured to provide a first fluid to a first point on the pad at a second radial distance from the central axis;
a second fluid delivery arm having a second nozzle configured to provide a second fluid to a second point on the pad, the second point disposed a third radial distance from the central axis; and
4. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the second radial distance is less than the first radial distance, and the third radial distance is greater than or equal to the second radial distance.
a second fluid delivery arm having a second nozzle configured to provide a second fluid to a second point on the pad, the second point disposed a third radial distance from the central axis, wherein the second radial distance is less than the first radial distance, and the third radial distance is greater than or equal to the second radial distance;
a controller adapted to cause movement of the second fluid delivery arm to control a radial entry point of the second fluid under the carrier assembly.
and a controller
The apparatus of claim 1, further comprising
a first actuator that is configured to cause the carrier assembly to translate across a surface of the pad such that the first radial distance varies between a first radial value and a second radial value as the carrier assembly is translated across the surface of the pad; and
2. The apparatus of claim 1, further comprising a first actuator that is configured to cause the carrier assembly to translate across a surface of the pad such that the first radial distance varies between a first radial value and a second radial value as the carrier assembly is translated across the surface of the pad;
a second actuator that is configured to cause the second fluid delivery arm to translate over the surface of the pad such that the third radial distance varies between a third radial value and a fourth radial value as the second fluid delivery arm is translated over the surface of the pad,
and a second actuator that is configured to cause the second fluid delivery arm to translate over the surface of the pad such that the third radial distance varies between a third radial value and a fourth radial value as the second fluid delivery arm is translated over the surface of the pad,
wherein the fourth radial value is greater than the first radial value or the second radial value.
wherein the fourth radial value is greater than the first radial value or the second radial value.
3. The apparatus of claim 2, further comprising a metrology unit disposed within the platen comprising a window disposed through the pad and a measurement unit, wherein the measurement unit is connected to a controller and is configured to measure a polishing rate near an edge of a substrate.
3. The apparatus of claim 2, further comprising a metrology unit disposed within the platen comprising a window disposed through the pad and a measurement unit, wherein the measurement unit is connected to the controller and is configured to measure a polishing rate near an edge of a substrate.
5. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein a magnitude of the third radial distance is less than a fourth radial distance that extends from the central axis to an outer most point on the carrier assembly.
4. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein a magnitude of the third radial distance is less than a fourth radial distance that extends from the central axis to an outer most point on the carrier assembly.
6. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first fluid delivery arm overlaps an entirety of a radial position occupied by the carrier assembly over the pad.
5. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first fluid delivery arm overlaps an entirety of a radial position occupied by the carrier assembly over the pad.
7. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the second fluid delivery arm extends over less than 60% of the pad radius.
6. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the second fluid delivery arm extends over less than 60% of the pad radius.
8. The apparatus of claim 7, wherein the second fluid delivery arm comprises:
a fluid source; and
a temperature control unit fluidly coupled to the fluid source and the second fluid delivery arm.
7. The apparatus of claim 6, wherein the second fluid delivery arm comprises: a fluid source; and a temperature control unit fluidly coupled to the fluid source and the second fluid delivery arm.
9. An apparatus for processing a substrate, comprising:
8. An apparatus for processing a substrate, comprising:
a platen;
a platen;
a pad disposed on the platen, the pad having a pad radius extending from a central axis;
a pad disposed on the platen, the pad having a pad radius extending from a central axis;
a carrier assembly disposed on the pad having a carrier radius that extends from a rotational axis of the carrier assembly;
a carrier assembly disposed on the pad having a carrier radius that extends from a rotational axis of the carrier assembly;
a first fluid delivery arm extending over at least 50% of the pad radius and configured to provide a first fluid to a first point on the pad;
a first fluid delivery arm extending over at least 50% of the pad radius and configured to provide a first fluid to a first point on the pad;
a second fluid delivery arm extending over less than 60% of the pad radius, the second fluid delivery arm configured to provide a second fluid to a second point on the pad, the second point disposed a radial distance from the central axis, the radial distance being greater than about 40% of the pad radius; and
a second fluid delivery arm extending over less than 60% of the pad radius, the second fluid delivery arm configured to provide a second fluid to a second point on the pad, the second point disposed a radial distance from the central axis, the radial distance being greater than about 40% of the pad radius;
a controller adapted to cause movement of the second fluid delivery arm to control a distance between the second point on the pad and the carrier assembly.
a controller
10. The apparatus of claim 9, further comprising a metrology unit connected to the controller and configured to measure a polishing rate near an edge of a substrate.
9. The apparatus of claim 8, further comprising a metrology unit connected to the controller and configured to measure a polishing rate near an edge of a substrate.
11. The apparatus of claim 9, wherein the second fluid delivery arm comprises:
a base plate;
a swivel actuator coupled to the base plate;
an extension member extending over the pad; and
a nozzle coupled to the extension member and disposed over the pad.
10. The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the second fluid delivery arm comprises: a base plate; a swivel actuator coupled to the base plate; an extension member extending over the pad; and a nozzle coupled to the extension member and disposed over the pad.
12. The apparatus of claim 11, wherein the first fluid delivery arm overlaps an entirety of a radial position occupied by the carrier assembly over the pad.
11. The apparatus of claim 10, wherein the first fluid delivery arm overlaps an entirety of a radial position occupied by the carrier assembly over the pad.
13. The apparatus of claim 11, further comprising:
a fluid source; and
a temperature control unit fluidly coupled to the fluid source and the second fluid delivery arm.
12. The apparatus of claim 10, further comprising: a fluid source; and a temperature control unit fluidly coupled to the fluid source and the second fluid delivery arm.
14. The apparatus of claim 9, wherein the carrier assembly is disposed a distance of at least 10% of a total radius of the pad from a center of the pad and no more than 90% of the total radius of the pad from the center of the pad.
13. The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the carrier assembly is disposed a distance of at least 10% of a total radius of the pad from a center of the pad and no more than 90% of the total radius of the pad from the center of the pad.
Claims 1 and 8 of US Patent 11724355 do not explicitly teach
a controller adapted to cause movement of the second fluid delivery arm to control a radial entry point of the second fluid under the carrier assembly and to control a distance between the second point on the pad and the carrier assembly.
However, Kiesel teaches a system for controlling chemical mechanical polishing including
a controller (125) adapted to cause movement of the second fluid delivery arm to control a radial entry point of the second fluid under the carrier assembly (paragraph 0060, wherein Kiesel teaches the movement of the slurry outlets can be controlled and changed automatically depending on process conditions such as inline wafer removal profile measurement, even slurry distribution over platen radius or wafer diameter, minimizing slurry consumption, and reducing defects due to uneven slurry distribution over wafer area) and to control a distance between the second point on the pad and the carrier assembly (paragraphs 0060 and 0056-0057, wherein Kiesel teaches the movement of the slurry outlets can be controlled and changed automatically depending on process conditions such as inline wafer removal profile measurement, even slurry distribution over platen radius or wafer diameter, minimizing slurry consumption, and reducing defects due to uneven slurry distribution over wafer area).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Claims 1 and 8 of US Patent 11724355 to incorporate the teachings of Kiesel to provide a controller adapted to cause movement of the second fluid delivery arm to control a radial entry point of the second fluid under the carrier assembly and to control a distance between the second point on the pad and the carrier assembly.
Specifically, it would have been obvious to incorporate the controller and functions of the controller as taught by Kiesel. Incorporating the controller would promote even distribution of the fluid over the wafer diameter [0060 of Kiesel] which promotes quality of the workpiece.
Conclusion
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Swedek et al. (US PGPUB 20190283204) teaches a translating polishing head similar to the claimed invention
Wang et al. (US PGPUB 20100048106) teaches a wafer polishing apparatus having first and second slurry dispensers (fig. 2) which is similar to the claimed invention
Sun et al. (US PGPUB 20060025049) teaches a slurry delivery system with multiple nozzles along the same arm (fig. 1) which is similar to the claimed invention
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL A GUMP whose telephone number is (571)272-2172. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 9:00-5:30.
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.
/MICHAEL A GUMP/ Examiner, Art Unit 3723