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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 6, 8, 11 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tsutsui (WO 2018/207672A1).
Per independent claim 1:
Tsutsui discloses a coating treatment apparatus for applying a coating solution to a peripheral portion of a substrate (see title and abstract), the coating treatment apparatus comprising:
a holding and rotating part configured to hold and rotate the substrate (Fig. 6);
a coating solution supply nozzle (31) configured to supply the coating solution to the peripheral portion of the substrate held by the holding and rotating part (Fig. 6);
a moving mechanism configured to move the coating solution supply nozzle (Fig.
6 shows moving the nozzle);
and a controller configured to control the holding and rotating part, the coating solution supply nozzle, and the moving mechanism (control unit, see page 2, paragraphs 1-5), wherein
the controller is configured to perform control of, while rotating the holding and rotating part which holds the substrate (page 2, paragraph 1-5):
moving the coating solution supply nozzle from an outside of a perimeter of the substrate to a predetermined position at a periphery on the substrate at a first speed by controlling the moving mechanism while supplying the coating solution by the coating solution supply nozzle (page 2, paragraph 3, “…control the nozzle conveyance unit to move the arrival position at a second movement speed higher than the first movement speed; Fig. 6(a) shows the nozzle is outside the perimeter of the substrate, and Fig.
6(b) shows a first speed v1 where the nozzle is moved to deposit material at the peripheral portion of substrate);
and then moving the coating solution supply nozzle from the predetermined position to the outside of the perimeter of the substrate at a second speed higher than the first speed by controlling the moving mechanism while supplying the coating solution by the coating solution supply nozzle (Fig. 6c shows a second speed v2 which moves it back to the predetermined position outside of the perimeter of the substrate at a second speed higher than the first speed; see page 6, 4th paragraph).
Per claim 3, the rotation speed of the substrate is 500 rpm or more (see page 9, example 1, “third rotation speed: 500 rpm, 1250 rpm).
Per claims 6 and 8, see rejection of claims 1 and 3 above.
Per claims 11 and 13, see rejection of claims 1 and 3 above (also see page 6, last paragraph which discloses a storage medium for carrying out the method steps).
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:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2, 4-5, 7, 9-10 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsutsui (WO 2018/207672A1) in view of Takahashi (CN109127299).
Per claims 2, 4, 7, and 9, Tsutsui discloses the second movement speed is 5-15 times the first movement speed (page 6, 4th paragraph) and the rotation speed of the substrate is 500 rpm or more (see page 9, example 1, “third rotation speed: 500 rpm, 1250 rpm). Tsutsui only discloses a first movement speed of 0.5 to 1.5 mm/s (page 6, 3rd paragraph and therefore only discloses a max second movement speed of 22.5 mm/s (1.5 times 15).
However, Takahashi discloses a coating apparatus for dispensing a film on a rotational wafer (see title, abstract and figures) in which the nozzle is moved at a speed of 1 mm/s to 20 mm/s during dispensing (see page 11, 4th to last paragraph).
It would have been obvious to have modified the dispensing nozzle speed of Tsutsui (this is the first movement speed) to be 1 mm/s to 20 mm/s as taught by Takahashi. One would have been motivated to do so because both references are in the same field of forming a liquid film on a rotational wafer, and thus using a known nozzle movement speed would have yielded predictable results with a reasonable expectation of success.
Since Tsutsui discloses a second nozzle movement speed of 5-15 times. This would yield a range of 5 mm/s to 300 mm/s for the second movement speed, which overlaps the claimed range of 50 mm/s. It would have been obvious to have selected a
portion of Tsutsui/Takahashi’s second movement speed which corresponds to the instantly claimed range (i.e. 50 mm/s to 300 mm/s).
Per claims 5 and 10, Tsutsui discloses a rotation speed that is 1250 pm (see page 9 example 1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XIAO SI ZHAO whose telephone number is (571)270-5343. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5:30PM.
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, Alexa Neckel can be reached at 571-272-2450. 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.
/XIAO S ZHAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1744