, 28-36DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 December 4, 2025 has been entered.
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 24-25, and 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erickson et al. (2003/0092361) in view of Soyama et al. (JP 4342039 machine translation provided), and Kikuchi (JP 04-049543 machine translation provided). Erickson teaches a support plate 106 for fabricating a glass substrate disk from a glass sheet, comprising a baseplate, a first circular protrusion disposed on a top surface of the baseplate, wherein the first circular protrusion is configured to provide a support surface for a glass substrate disk and to enclose a first recess configured to receive a circular portion of the glass sheet after separation of the circular portion, and a second circular protrusion disposed on the top surface of the baseplate, wherein the second circular protrusion is configured to provide a support surface for the glass substrate disk ([0067], [0068], figures 8-10). Erickson also teaches the support plate further comprises a plurality of vacuum holes (172) that facilitate application of a vacuum via a vacuum source on a portion of the glass sheet to affix the glass sheet on the support plate ([0056], [0066]-[0067], figure 8). Note, the glass sheet / substrate disk is considered the material to be worked upon by the apparatus, and thus is not given patentable weight. Since the support plate comprises the two concentric protrusions, it is deemed capable of supporting inner and outer diameter edges of a glass sheet / substrate disk. Erickson further teaches a cutting device configured to cut a glass sheet along a first and second circular paths ([0030]-[0033], fig. 1)
However, Erickson doesn’t specify a vacuum in the protrusions. Soyama teaches a support plate for a glass disk comprising a baseplate and a circular protrusion disposed on a top surface of the baseplate that is configured to provide a support surface for a glass substrate disk and enclose a first recess configured to receive a circular portion of the glass sheet after separation of the circular portion (i.e. figures 10, 12, 18-22, and 26, [0019]). Soyama further teaches providing a vacuum hole on the protrusion to facilitate application of vacuum on the glass sheet, as well as a vacuum hole in the first recess that can facilitated application of a vacuum on the circular portion of the glass sheet ([0019], [0038]-[0041]). Soyama teaches the vacuum hole on the protrusion assist in securing the glass sheet and the vacuum hole in the first recess assist in removing the circular portion. Kikuchi similarly teaches supporting a glass disk on a first circular protrusion 104 and a second circular protrusion 206, wherein the first circular protrusion encloses a first recess 105 (paragraph bridging pages 9 and 10, page 11). Kikuchi also teaches providing first 107 and second 207 vacuum holes on the first and second circular protrusions to facilitate application of vacuum on the portion of the glass sheet that is in contact with the protrusions, and a vacuum device for applying vacuum via the vacuum holes, thereby affixing the glass sheet on the support plate (“vacuum pump on pages 10 and 11, figure 1). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have employed vacuum holes on the first and second protrusions of Erickson, so as to assist in securing the glass sheet and help facilitate the removal of a circular portion from the center, as taught by Soyama and Kikuchi. As mentioned, the glass sheet / substrate disk is considered the material to be worked upon by the apparatus, and thus is not given patentable weight. Since the support plate comprises the two concentric protrusions, and the vacuum holes on the protrusions holds a glass disk in place, it is deemed capable of maintaining a disk portion on the support plate when a non-disk portion of the glass sheet outside of the second circular path separates from the disk portion after cutting the glass sheet along the second circular path.
Regarding claim 25, Soyama further teaches providing a vacuum hole in the first recess that can facilitated application of a vacuum on the circular portion of the glass sheet ([0019], [0038]-[0041]). Soyama teaches the vacuum hole in the first recess assist in removing the circular portion. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have further employed a vacuum hole on the first recess so as to help facilitate the removal of a circular portion from the center, as taught by Soyama.
Regarding claim 28, Erickson shows in figure 9, the second protrusion encloses a second recess (near indicator 124) disposed between the second circular protrusion and the first circular protrusion.
Regarding claim 29, the glass substrate disk is considered a material to be worked upon and is not given patentable weight. Nonetheless, as can be seen in figure 8 of Erickson, the first circular protrusion and the second circular protrusion are concentric, as well as a glass substrate disk supported thereon.
Claims 24 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Soyama et al. (JP 4342039 machine translation provided) in view of Erickson et al. (2003/0092361) and Kikuchi (JP 04-049543 machine translation provided). Regarding claim 24, Soyama teaches a support plate for a glass disk comprising a baseplate and a circular protrusion disposed on a top surface of the baseplate that is configured to provide a support surface for a glass substrate disk and to enclose a first recess configured to receive a circular portion of a glass sheet after separation of the circular portion (i.e. figures 10, 12, 18-22, and 26, [0019]). Soyama further teaches the circular protrusion includes a vacuum hole configured to facilitate application of vacuum on the glass sheet, as well as a vacuum hole in the first recess that can facilitated application of a vacuum on the circular portion of the glass sheet ([0019], [0038]-[0041]). Soyama teaches the vacuum hole on the protrusion assist in securing the glass sheet and the vacuum hole in the first recess assist in removing the circular portion. Soyama further teaches a cutting device configured to cut the glass sheet along a first circular path that corresponds to an inner edge of the glass substrate disk and along a second circular path that corresponds to an outer diameter edge of the glass substrate disk ([0031]). Soyama also teaches a vacuum device configured to apply the vacuum to the glass sheet via the vacuum hole to affix a disk portion of the glass sheet that corresponds to the glass substrate on the support plate while the cutting device cuts the glass sheet along the circular path and to maintain the disk portion on the support plate when a non-disk portion of the glass sheet separates from the disk portion ([0020]-[0021]).
However, Soyama does not suggest two circular protrusions. Like Soyama, Erickson teaches a support plate 106 for fabricating a glass substrate disk from a glass sheet. Erickson specifies the support plate comprises a baseplate, a first circular protrusion disposed on a top surface of the baseplate, wherein the first circular protrusion is configured to provide a support surface for a glass substrate disk and to enclose a first recess configured to receive a circular portion of the glass sheet after separation of the circular portion, and a second circular protrusion disposed on the top surface of the baseplate, wherein the second circular protrusion is configured to provide a support surface for the glass substrate disk ([0067], [0068], figures 8-10). Erickson also teaches the support plate further comprises a plurality of vacuum holes (172) that facilitate application of a vacuum via a vacuum source on a portion of the glass sheet to affix the glass sheet on the support plate ([0056], [0066]-[0067], figure 8). Also like Soyama, Kikuchi teaches a support plate comprising a baseplate, a first circular protrusion 104 disposed on a top surface of the baseplate, wherein the first circular protrusion is configured to provide a support surface for an inner diameter edge of a glass substrate disk and to enclose a first recess 105 (paragraph bridging pages 9 and 10, page 11) configured to receive a circular portion of a glass sheet after separation of the circular portion, and wherein the first circular protrusion includes at least one first vacuum hole configured to facilitate application of a vacuum on a first portion of the glass sheet in contact with the first circular protrusion (“vacuum pump on pages 10 and 11, figure 1), and a second circular protrusion 206 disposed on the top surface of the baseplate, wherein the second circular protrusion is configured to provide a support surface for an outer diameter edge of the glass substrate disk, and wherein the second circular protrusion includes at least one second vacuum hole configured to facilitate application of a vacuum on a second portion the glass sheet in contact with the second circular protrusion (“vacuum pump on pages 10 and 11, figure 1). Kikuchi teaches the vacuum on the first protrusion secures the inner peripheral part of the glass disk and the vacuum on the second protrusion secures the outer peripheral part of the glass disk (paragraph bridging pages 7-8). The combination of the two protrusions provides for securing means for an inner periphery and an outer periphery of the glass disk. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have provide for a first and second protrusions for securing the inner and outer peripheries of the glass disk, to ensure accurate cutting and separation of the non-disk portions. Note, the glass sheet / substrate disk is considered the material to be worked upon by the apparatus, and thus is not given patentable weight. Since the support plate comprises the two concentric protrusions, it is deemed capable of supporting inner and outer diameter edges of a glass sheet / substrate disk.
Regarding claim 36, as can be seen in at least figures 12 and 18 of Soyama, the outer diameter of the protrusion is smaller than an outer diameter of the glass disk, which would allow the non-disk portion to fall when the non-disk portion separates after cutting.
Claims 30-33 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erickson et al. (2003/0092361), Soyama et al. (JP 4342039 machine translation provided), and Kikuchi (JP 04-049543 machine translation provided) as applied to claim 24 above, and further in view of Bohme (2019/0225530). Regarding claim 30 and 35, Erickson teaches separating a circular portion from the glass sheet ([0012]), but doesn’t specify a laser system for forming a plurality of holes in the glass sheet to aid in the separation. Bohme teaches an apparatus for separating a glass disk from a glass sheet ([0008], [0037]), the apparatus comprising a first laser device configured to apply a first laser for defining a contour line along a circular path ([0126], [0064], figure 5A), and a second laser device configured to apply a second laser to cut the glass sheet along the circular path ([0139]) by producing thermal stress along the contour line ([0062]), wherein the second laser is a CO2 laser ([0024]-[0025], [0029], [0066]). Bohme further specifies the first laser can be a Nd:YAG laser having a wavelength of 532nm ([0072]), wherein the laser forms a plurality of holes through the glass sheet (“material removed” [0071], figures 1 and 5) along the contour line and the second laser has a wavelength of 10600nm ([0139]), which is a greater than the wavelength of the Nd:YAG laser. Bohme teaches the combination of forming contour line by using a first laser and then cutting by applying a thermal stress via a second laser provides for high separation quality with cut edges having very low roughness and high precision ([0083]-[0084]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have employed a first laser, such as a Nd:YAG laser for producing holes defining cutting line and a second laser, such as a CO2 laser, for effecting the cutting of the glass by inducing thermal stress along the cutting line, as such a combination provides for high quality cutting with low roughness and high precision. Also, since the laser device of Bohme can cut in a circular path, it would also be able to provide multiple circular cutting paths.
Regarding claim 31, Erickson teaches a vacuum device configured to apply the vacuum to the glass sheet to affix the glass sheet on the support plate while performing the cutting ([0011]), and Bohme teaches the first laser is configured to form a plurality of holes (“material removal” [0071]-[0072], figures 1, 4, 5). The limitation of producing the holes in conjunction with the vacuum is considered a manner of operating the apparatus that does not provide further structural limitation to the apparatus claim, and thus, is not given patentable weight. Nonetheless, naturally, both the vacuum device of Erickson and gravity would work in conjunction to separate the circular portion, as Bohme specifies the second laser separates the portion completely ([0117]).
Regarding claim 32, the limitation of cutting the glass sheet without the vacuum is considered a manner of operating the apparatus that does not provide further structural limitation to the apparatus claim, and thus, is not given patentable weight. As discussed above, Bohme teaches the second laser is configured to cut the glass sheet along the circular path.
Regarding claim 33, Erickson teaches a platform associated with the support plate for supporting the glass sheet (figures 1 and 2). Erickson also teaches moving the cutting apparatus relative to the glass sheet ([0032]). In modifying Erickson with laser devices for cutting, Bohme teaches moving the glass sheet and the lasers relative to one another, by either moving the laser and keeping the glass sheet stationary, or moving the glass sheet and keeping the laser stationary. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have tried moving the platform relative to the laser, as Bohme teaches there are only two predictable solutions for producing circular cutting lines on the glass sheet, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 35, as mentioned above, Bohme teaches the first laser is a Nd:YAG laser ([0072]) and the second laser is a CO2 laser ([0025]).
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erickson et al. (2003/0092361) and Bohme (2019/0225530) as applied to claim 33 above, and further in view of Yun (KR 20120056606 machine translation provided). As discussed above, Erickson teaches a platform associated with the support plate and Bohme teaches moving the glass sheet and keeping the laser stationary. However, Bohme doesn’t specify a second laser that is configured to optically move a focus of the second laser while the second laser device remains stationary with respect to the glass sheet. Yun teaches an apparatus for cutting a glass sheet, the apparatus comprising a laser for effecting thermal stress on the glass sheet so as to cut the glass sheet along the cutting line (abstract). Yun further teaches the laser is configured to optically move a focus of the second laser while the second laser device remains stationary with respect to the glass sheet. More specifically, the laser “S” remains stationary, while mirror M changes the direction of the laser beam, and optical unit “H” is moved and rotated to irradiate the glass sheet with the laser beam along the desired cutting line (page 5, figure 5). Yun essentially teaches an arrangement for moving the laser beam along the cutting of the glass sheet while keeping the laser stationary. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have pursue a similar solution of a laser device as Yun, for the second laser of Bohme in the modification of Erickson, as a known means for moving the laser beam along a cutting line and producing thermal stress for effecting the cutting of the glass sheet, as Yun teaches it is a predictable means for successful separation of the glass sheet. The limitation of optically moving a focus of the second laser along a first circular path and along a second circular path is considered a manner of operating the apparatus that does not provide further structural limitation to the apparatus claim, and thus, is not given patentable weight. As discussed above, Bohme teaches the second laser is configured to cut the glass sheet along the circular path.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12 and 15-23 are allowed.
Claims 26-27 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art fails to teach a single vacuum path coupled to a first vacuum hole in a first circular protrusion, a second vacuum hole in a second circular protrusion, and a third vacuum hole in a recess, wherein the first circular protrusion comprises at least one vacuum hole of the plurality of vacuum holes that is configured to facilitate application of the vacuum on a first portion the glass sheet in contact with the first circular protrusion, wherein the second circular protrusion comprises at least one vacuum hole of the plurality of vacuum holes that is configured to facilitate application of the vacuum on a second portion of the glass sheet in contact with the second circular protrusion, and wherein the first recess includes at least one vacuum hole of the plurality of vacuum holes that is configured to facilitate application of the vacuum on the circular portion of the glass sheet. The prior art also fails to teach a protrusion having a cross sectional shape of a flat top mountain shape.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 20, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues Kikuchi does not teach applying the vacuum while forming a disk substrate by cutting, but instead teaches applying vacuum to a glass disk that is already in disk form. Thus, Kikuchi cannot recognize the benefit of applying a vacuum to disk portion of a glass sheet when a non-disk portion is separate therefrom. Applicant has argued limitations that are considered functional language that recites a manner of operating the apparatus. Since the apparatus of Erickson, Soyama, and Kikuchi provide for the claimed parts of a support plate with two concentric circular protrusions with vacuum holes and a cutting device, it is configured to and capable of performing the functional language argued.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUEENIE S DEHGHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8209. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:30.
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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached at 571-270-7001. 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.
/QUEENIE S DEHGHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741