DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Elections/Restrictions
2. This office action is a response to Applicant's election filed on 01/12/2026 with traverse of Group I, claims 1-12 for further examination. Claims 13-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
The traversal is on the grounds that there is no serious search burden to examine both species together since claims 1-12 include nearly all of the features recited in claims 13-17 and claims 18-20. Accordingly, there would not be a serious burden to examine Groups I - III together. This is not found persuasive because even though a few U.S. Patents disclosing multiple post baking apparatus may have some of the common features of all species, it is recognized that each post baking apparatus has features that are characterized as separate and distinct subject for inventive efforts. Thus, regardless of the search method, inventions with different limitations will require different search strategies, and the times to consider the relevancy of collective references would increase proportionality as well and it is necessary to search for one of the inventions in a manner that is not likely to result in finding art pertinent to the other invention. The findings of separate and distinct structural limitations and configurations would justify a serious burden on the examiner if restriction is not required. See MPEP 808.02.
Thus far, applicant has not proved or provided convincing argument that there is no material difference between the three species currently on the record. Therefore, the requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Priority
3. Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/29/2023 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections
5. 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 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.
6. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
7. 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.
8. Claims 1-9 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Buchberger, Jr. et al. (US 2016/0357107 A1) hereinafter Buchberger (the terminology of the claims in the application is used, but the references of Buchberger are included between parentheses).
Regarding claim 1, the recitation “exposed photoresist film… the exposed photoresist film, to control diffusions of an acid or a secondary electron, which are generated from the exposed photoresist film”, this recitation is a statement of process expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and intended use which does not patentably distinguish over Buchberger since Buchberger meets all the structural elements of the claim and is capable of having an exposed photoresist film substrate and controlling diffusions of an acid or a secondary electron, which are generated from the exposed photoresist film, if so desired, and does not add structure to the claim. Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and intended use of a known apparatus does not give it patentable weight. See In re Thuau, 57 USPQ 324, CCPA 979 135 F2d 344, 1943. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus shows all of the structural limitations of the claim. See Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). It is additionally noted that it is well settled that the intended use of a claimed apparatus is not germane to the issue of the patentability of the claimed structure. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the claimed use then it meets the claim. In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235, 238 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 459 (CCPA 1963). Furthermore, “expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.” See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666,667 (Bd. App. 1969). Thus, the “inclusion of material or article worked upon does not impart patentability to the claims.” In re Young, 75 F.2d 966, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 (USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963)). Therefore, Examiner is disregarding any structural limitations to the apparatus based on process expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and the process intended to be used with the apparatus. See MPEP 2114 & 2115.
As regards to claim 1, Buchberger discloses a post baking apparatus (abs; fig 1), comprising:
a baking chamber (100) configured to receive a substrate (140) with an exposed photoresist film ([0021]-[0024]; fig 1);
a lower heater (132) in the baking chamber (100) under the substrate (140) to heat the exposed photoresist film ([0021]-[0026]; fig 1);
an applier (116+118+160+170+174+176+196) applying an electric field or a magnetic field to the exposed photoresist film along a vertical (z) direction, which is substantially perpendicular to an upper surface (top surface of 140) of the exposed photoresist film, capable of controlling diffusions of an acid or a secondary electron, which are generated from the exposed photoresist film, along a horizontal (x) direction ([0024]-[0040]; [0045]-[0047]; [0049]; [0052]; [0054]; [0063]; [0065]; fig 1-5B); and
a controller (implicit, [0006]-[0007]; [0020]; [0026]-[0027]; [0031]-[0032]; [0046]) configured to control an operation of the applier (116+118+160+170+174+176+196) ([0024]-[0040]; [0045]-[0047]; [0049]; [0052]; [0054]; [0063]; [0065]; fig 1-5B).
As regards to claim 2, Buchberger discloses a post baking apparatus (abs; fig 1), wherein the applier (116+118+160+170+174+176+196) includes: a lower electrode (118) under the lower heater (132); and an upper electrode (116) over the substrate (140) to form the electric field between the lower electrode (118) and the upper electrode (116) along the vertical (z) direction ([0024]-[0040]; [0045]-[0047]; [0049]; [0052]; [0054]; [0063]; [0065]; fig 1-5B).
As regards to claim 3, Buchberger discloses a post baking apparatus (abs; fig 1), wherein the electric field is formed from the lower electrode (118) to the upper electrode (116) along the vertical (z) direction ([0024]-[0040]; [0045]-[0047]; [0049]; [0052]; [0054]; [0063]; [0065]; fig 1-5B).
As regards to claim 4, Buchberger discloses a post baking apparatus (abs; fig 1), wherein the applier (116+118+160+170+174+176+196) further includes a power source (174) connected to the lower electrode (118) ([0024]-[0040]; [0045]-[0047]; [0049]; [0052]; [0054]; [0063]; [0065]; fig 1-5B).
As regards to claim 5, Buchberger discloses a post baking apparatus (abs; fig 1), wherein the applier (116+118+160+170+174+176+196) further includes a coil (196 - electromagnets coupled to a power supply) on an inner sidewall of the baking chamber (100) to form the magnetic field along the vertical (z) direction ([0024]-[0040]; [0045]-[0047]; [0049]; [0052]; [0054]; [0063]; [0065]; fig 1-5B).
As regards to claim 6, Buchberger discloses a post baking apparatus (abs; fig 1), wherein the magnetic field is formed from the upper electrode (116) to the lower electrode (118) along the vertical (z) direction via the coil (196 - electromagnets coupled to a power supply) ([0024]-[0040]; [0045]-[0047]; [0049]; [0052]; [0054]; [0063]; [0065]; fig 1-5B).
As regards to claim 7, Buchberger discloses a post baking apparatus (abs; fig 1), wherein the controller (implicit, [0006]-[0007]; [0020]; [0026]-[0027]; [0031]-[0032]; [0046]) controls operations of the lower electrode (118) and the coil (196 - electromagnets coupled to a power supply) ([0024]-[0040]; [0045]-[0047]; [0049]; [0052]; [0054]; [0063]; [0065]; fig 1-5B).
As regards to claim 8, Buchberger discloses a post baking apparatus (abs; fig 1), wherein the controller (implicit, [0006]-[0007]; [0020]; [0026]-[0027]; [0031]-[0032]; [0046]) controls an operation of the lower heater (132) [0006]-[0007]; [0020]; [0026]; [0031]-[0032]; [0046]; [0062]; fig 1).
As regards to claim 9, Buchberger discloses a post baking apparatus (abs; fig 1), wherein the lower heater (132) includes a plate heater (see fig 1) ([0026]-[0027]; [0062]; fig 1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
9. 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 of this title, 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.
10. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
11. Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buchberger as applied to claim 1 above, (the terminology of the claims in the application is used, but the references of Buchberger are included between parentheses).
As regards to claim 10, Buchberger discloses a post baking apparatus (abs; fig 1), further comprising an upper heater ([0027]) positioned within or outside baking chamber (100) to heat the substrate (140) ([0026]-[0027]; [0062]; fig 1), however Buchberger does not disclose over the substrate (140).
Although Buchberger does not explicitly disclose the claimed upper heater configuration of over the substrate, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of Buchberger to have the upper heater configuration of over the substrate recited in the claim and therefore is not expected to alter the operation of the device in a patentably distinct way as Buchberger discloses other heating sources, for example, heat lamps may be positioned within or outside the chamber 100 ([0027]) and since “the particular placement of structural components was held to be an obvious matter of design choice.” In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975).
As regards to claim 11, Buchberger discloses a post baking apparatus (abs; fig 1), wherein the upper heater ([0027]) includes a lamp heater ([0027]) ([0026]-[0027]; [0062]; fig 1).
As regards to claim 12, Buchberger discloses a post baking apparatus (abs; fig 1), wherein the controller (implicit, [0006]-[0007]; [0020]; [0026]-[0027]; [0031]-[0032]; [0046]) controls an impulse of the lamp heater (implicit, [0006]-[0007]; [0020]; [0026]-[0027]; [0031]-[0032]; [0046]).
Conclusion
12. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: all references cited on the attached PTO-892 Notice of References Cited excluding the above relied upon references.
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jethro M Pence whose telephone number is (571)270-7423. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 8:00 A.M. - 6:30 P.M..
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, Dah-Wei D. Yuan can be reached on 571-272-1295. 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.
/Jethro M. Pence/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1717