DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Acknowledgements
This office action is in response to the communication filed 5/18/2026.
Claims 1-3 and 5-19 are pending, Claims 2-3, 5-6 and 8-15 are withdrawn, and Claims 1, 7 and 16-19 have been examined.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claims 1, 7 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Kitano et al. (US 5,944,894 A) in view KR20110078255A (previously cited) (machine translation attached), Ogata et al. (US 2014/0360540 A1), KR20100060094A (machine translation attached) and KR102221337B1 (machine translation attached).
Re claim 1, Kitano discloses a substrate processing apparatus (title, abstract) comprising:
a holder (col. 4 line 43 spin chuck) configured to hold a substrate;
a second processing cup (col. 4 line 43 cup CP) provided around the holder;
a first supply (col. 1 line 50 treatment solution, inherently must have a supply) configured to supply a chemical liquid to the substrate held by the holder;
a second supply (refs. 160, 162, 164, 166, 168) configured to supply a rinse liquid (water) or a drying liquid to the substrate held by the holder;
a drain block (ref. 83) provided at a bottom of the second processing cup, and selectively connected to a drain line (ref. 195 beyond valve 196) or a recovery line (ref. 110) via a line switch (refs. 194, 196; here, the control of refs. 194, 196 satisfies a line switch depending on the concentration of ammonia to drain or circulate after ammonia removal, see col. 2 lines 50-58, col. 9 lines 1-9) (To any extent “a line switch” implies a singular switch, the replacement of multiple valves with a multi-way/three-way valve is prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in art, for the same purpose of controlling fluid flow and reasonable expectations of success.); and
a first gauge (ref. 189) provided in the drain block, and configured to measure a purity of the rinse liquid or the drying liquid (col. 2 lines 50-58, col. 9 lines 1-9); and
a controller (ref. 170) configured to: (ii) control the line switch based on the purity measured by the first gauge (col. 9 lines 1-9 describing the reverse drain when it is not recoverable; col. 7 lines 49-56, col. 8 lines 60-67 describing the circulation circuit for recoverable/low concentration).
Kitano does not explicitly disclose a singular line switch, wherein the drain line and the recovery line are configured to branch from the line switch without overlapping and a first processing cup and a second processing cup disposed inside or outside the first processing cup, and a cup switch configured to switch between a first state where the first processing cup receives a liquid and a second state where the second processing cup receives a liquid (Kitano teaches one [second] processing cup connected to the corresponding drain block) and (i) control the cup switch to switch from the first state to the second state while the rinse liquid or the drying liquid is being supplied to the substrate, (ii) subsequent to switching to the second state, measure the purity of the rinse liquid or the drying liquid by using the first gauge while the rinse liquid or the drying liquid is being supplied to the substrate in the second state, and control the line switch such that the rinse liquid or the drying liquid flows into the recovery line when the purity measured by the first gauge is equal to or greater than a threshold value, and flows into the drain line when the purity measured by the first gauge is less than the threshold value.
Regarding the singular drain line switch, KR20110078255A teaches it is well-known in the substrate processing art to provide a singular drain line switch (ref. 300, see fig. 2A) wherein the drain line (ref. 200, 160, 170) and the recovery line (ref. 140, 180, 190) are configured to branch without overlapping, and control the line switch (ref. 300) such that the rinse liquid or the drying liquid flows into the recovery line (ref. 140) when the purity measured by the first gauge is equal to or greater than a threshold value, and flows into the drain line (ref. 150) when the purity measured by the first gauge is less than the threshold value.
Regarding the first and second processing cups, Ogata discloses it is well-known in the substrate processing apparatus art (abstract) to provide a first processing cup and a second processing cup disposed inside or outside the first processing cup (see figs. 1 and 3-7 refs. 51, 52, 53 first, second and third cups), and a cup switch (refs. 7, 610, 620) configured to switch between a first state where the first processing cup receives a liquid and a second state where the second processing cup receives a liquid (see figs. 1 and 3-7), each of the cups connected to a corresponding discharge line (refs. 111, 121, 131), and (i) control the cup switch to switch from the first state to the second state while the rinse liquid or the drying liquid is being supplied to the substrate (see figs. 1 and 3-7).
Regarding “(ii) subsequent to switching to the second state, measure the purity of the rinse liquid or the drying liquid by using the first gauge while the rinse liquid or the drying liquid is being supplied to the substrate in the second state, and control the line switch such that the rinse liquid or the drying liquid flows into the recovery line when the purity measured by the first gauge is equal to or greater than a threshold value, and flows into the drain line when the purity measured by the first gauge is less than the threshold value”, KR20100060094A teaches a plurality of cups for separate liquids (refs. 130, see fig. 1) may feed separate discharge lines (refs. 138, 139), and the cleaning liquid cup (ref. 132, 133) and cleaning liquid discharge line may recover or drain at an independent cleaning regeneration unit based on concentration (“ The first recovery line 138 recovers or drains the cleaning liquid introduced into the first recovery container 132 to the cleaning solution regeneration unit (not shown) during the cleaning process of the substrate W or the cleaning process of the substrate support member 110. The second recovery line 139 recovers the chemical liquid introduced into the second and third recovery containers 134 and 136 to the chemical liquid regeneration unit (not shown) during the chemical liquid treatment process of the substrate W…performing concentration control”) (see fig. 2 S7, S8), after switching from the chemical liquid and chemical liquid cup (see fig. 2 S3 to S6). Here, it being prima facie obvious in the combination to thus incorporate plural cups each with separate regeneration units (as in KR20110078255A and/or Kitano) and thus at least the cleaning liquid with its respective cleaning liquid cup 132, 133 requires a first gauge (as in KR20110078255A and/or Kitano) which is prima facie obvious to be located at the bottom of a drain block of the cleaning liquid’s respective cup (as in Kitano), in order to measure the concentration of the cleaning liquid at the point of collection. See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C) Rearrangement of Parts.
To any extent the combination is unclear as to the location of the first gauge with respect to a cup, Examiner cites KR102221337B1 for disclosing it is known to provide a first gauge (“concentration meter is installed in waste liquid path 61 [not shown]” installed at a bottom of a second cup (ref. 61 provided at bottom of ref. 51), for measuring the purity of the rinse liquid or the drying liquid by using the first gauge while the rinse liquid or the drying liquid is being supplied to the substrate in the second state (“concentration of the treatment liquid reaches a predetermined concentration or more”), and control the line switch such that the rinse liquid or the drying liquid flows into the recovery line when the purity measured by the first gauge is equal to or greater than a threshold value, and flows into the drain line when the purity measured by the first gauge is less than the threshold value (“raise the cup body 51” “cup body 51 is raised to a high position (first height position)” i.e. recovery; and the inverse is thus implied that the cup body 51 is lowered for waste liquid, based on the concentration).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the lien switch of Kitano to further include a line switch wherein the drain line and the recovery line do not overlap, as suggested by KR20110078255A, in order to independently or sequentially control whether to drain, recover or recycle; and to further include a first processing cup and a second processing cup and a switch, as suggested by Ogata, in order to separately capture and discharge different processing chemicals; and to further have each processing cup feed to a regeneration unit that recovers or drains based on concentration of an implied gauge, as suggested by KR20100060094A, in order to enable each processing fluid to be recovered or drained; and to further locate the first gauge for the cleaning liquid at the bottom of the second processing cup for redirecting the liquid to recovery or waste/drain, as suggested by KR102221337B1, in order to only collect/recover liquid of sufficient concentration/purity.
Re claim 7, Independent claim 7 is drawn to a supply system wholly incorporating claim 1. Kitano discloses as shown above and Kitano further discloses a supply system (see fig. 7), a regeneration system (ref. 190 ammonia eliminator) connected to the recovery line of the substrate processing apparatus configured to perform a regeneration process on the rinse liquid recovered from the recovery line; a generation system (refs. 111, 112, 113, 110, 114, 115) connected to the regeneration system, and configured to generate a new rinse liquid from a regenerated rinse liquid obtained by the regeneration process and processed raw water (via ref. 165), and supply the new rinse liquid generated by the generation system to the second supply of the substrate processing apparatus (via ref. 92); and a raw water processing system (ref. 164, 165, 106) connected to the generation system, and configured to supply the processed raw water to the generation system.
Re claim 16, Kitano and/or KR20110078255A further discloses wherein the controller is further configured to control the line switch such that the rinse liquid or the drying liquid flows into the drain line when determined that a purity of the rinse liquid or the drying liquid is less than a threshold value (Kitano “the controller 170 opens a valve 196 to discharge the water with a high ammonia concentration to the outside in accordance with concentration detection signal from sensor 189” (col. 9 lines 1-9); KR20110078255A “when the measured concentration of the first densitometer exceeds the reference value (S20), the first three-way valve is opened (S30) so that the solution flows into the wastewater line (S30), or when the solution does not exceed the reference value, the recovery / reuse line Open the first three-way valve (S70) to flow to.”).
Re claim 17, KR20110078255A wherein no regeneration process is performed upstream of the line switch (see fig. 2a no regeneration process upstream of the line switch 300).
Re claim 18, Regarding “wherein the controller is further configured to continue controlling the line switch based on the purity measured by the first gauge while the rinse liquid or the drying liquid is being supplied to the substrate in the second state, until the second supply stops supplying the rinse liquid or the drying liquid to the substrate”, here, as disclosed by Kitano, KR20110078255A and KR20100060094A, the drain or recovery operates continuously for any liquid flowing thereby the gauge. Here, it being prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the controller monitor a gauge only when it is expected to have liquid supplied thereto (i.e. in the combination, when the cup is in the rinse collection position and rinse liquid is being supplied).
Re claim 19, Regarding “wherein the first gauge comprises at least one of a conductivity meter, a concentration meter, a specific resistance meter, a pH meter, or a total organic carbon (TOC) meter”, Kitano further discloses a concentration meter (ref. 189 concentration sensor). KR20110078255A discloses a concentration meter (ref. 200 concentration meter). KR102221337B1 discloses a concentration meter (“concentration meter”).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/18/2026 have been fully considered and are persuasive in part. Therefore the previous rejection is withdrawn. A new ground of rejection has been made above.
In response to Applicant’s arguments, Applicant’ against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Here, Kitano is cited for disclosing the general concept of a first gauge (ref. 189) being within a drain block (ref. 183), said drain block leading to a) recovery (ref. 193) or b) drain (ref. 195) which is switched (refs. 194, 196) based on measurements from the first gauge. KR20110078255A further discloses multiple drain branches having multiple gauges, each gauge followed immediately by a line switch based on the measurement of the immediately upstream gauge (in particular the first gauge 200 controls switching of line switch 300 between recovery (ref. 140) and drain (ref. 150). KR20100060094A teaches a plurality of cups (refs. 132, 134, 136), including a rinsing/cleaning liquid cup for rinsing/cleaning liquid (ref. 132,133) subsequent to a chemical liquid cup (ref. 134,135), and each cup leading to recovery or drain (via independent separate regeneration units (not shown) that necessarily has a gauge).
Applicant’s arguments as to KR20100060094A teaching the gauges are associated with regeneration units located downstream of the processing cups are not persuasive, because Kitano teaches a gauge within the drain block itself, rather than in a later downstream line. In the combination contemplated by Examiner, Applicant’s claimed inventive feature is simply the mere selection or relocation of a gauge into one of two known locations, i.e. in a drain block/physical collection cup (as in Kitano) or in a downstream line (as in KR20110078255A and KR20100060094A). Here, Examiner finds the simple rearrangement of the gauge/sensor upstream to a cup, such as the cups in KR20100060094A to be prima facie obvious, there being no intervening processes or switches and the concentration slightly downstream on a line being exactly the same concentration as the cup that feeds said line. See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C).
As such, Applicant’s arguments are directed to the motivation and/or feasibility of moving a concentration gauge, from downstream of a known cup, slightly upstream into the cup itself, based on the teachings of Kitano showing a concentration gauge within a singular cup/drain block (rather than downstream after collection/draining from the general collection region). Nonetheless, Examiner has cited KR 102221337 B1 for explicitly disclosing a concentration meter/gauge installed at the bottom of a cup.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20190295862 A1; US20160225682A1 note sensors for measuring concentrations at the bottoms portions of cup.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7299. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am to 6:30pm.
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, Michael Barr can be reached on 571-272-1414. 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.
KEVIN G. LEE
Examiner
Art Unit 1711
/KEVIN G LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 1711
/MICHAEL E BARR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1711
Prosecution Insights