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 .
Specification
The attempt to incorporate subject matter into this application by reference to Japan patent Application No 2021-056759 and PCT/JP2022/013510 is ineffective because the incorporation by reference was filed after the PCT date of March 23, 2022, which considered the filing date of the US application. As such, the incorporation by reference statement must be removed, as it introduces new matter by being filed after the filing date of the application.
See MPEP §608.01(p) I B: “For the incorporation by reference to be effective as a proper safeguard, the incorporation by reference statement must be filed at the time of filing of the later-filed application. An incorporation by reference statement added after an application’s filing date is not effective because no new matter can be added to an application after its filing date”;
MPEP 1893.03(b): “An international application designating the U.S. has two stages (international and national) with the filing date being the same in both stages. Often the date of entry into the national stage is confused with the filing date. It should be borne in mind that the filing date of the international stage application is also the filing date for the national stage application. Specifically, 35 U.S.C. 363 provides that An international application designating the United States shall have the effect, from its international filing date under Article 11 of the treaty, of a national application for patent regularly filed in the Patent and Trademark Office”, and
MPEP 714.01(e): “A preliminary amendment filed with a submission to enter the national stage of an international application under 35 U.S.C. 371 is not part of the original disclosure under 37 CFR 1.115(a) because it was not present on the international filing date accorded to the application under PCT Article 11.” as well as:
PCT Article 11(3) - “...an international filing date shall have the effect of a regular national application in each designated State as of the international filing date, which date shall be considered to be the actual filing date in each designated State.”
The specification amendment filed 08/24/2023 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: the incorporation by reference to Japan patent Application No 2021-056759 and PCT/JP2022/013510.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1-6 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 1, claim 1 cites “wherein the polishing layer included hollow microspheres that form hollow bodies within the polishing layer
A cross-section of the polishing layer has an average pore diameter of 10-14µm” and additional references to pores. This is unclear as the pore or pores lack antecedent basis in the claims. Examiner assumes that pores are related to said microspheres, and represent a possible state of the microspheres, as described in Para [0016] of the specification “The polishing layer 4 includes hollow microspheres 4A in a dispersed state. Since the hollow microspheres 4A are included in a dispersed state, once the polishing layer 4 is worn, the hollow microspheres 4A are exposed on a polishing surface, and fine voids are generated on the polishing surface. The slurry is held in these fine voids, whereby it is possible to further progress the polishing of the item to be polished 8.”. For the purposes of examination pores and microspheres will be interpreted interchangeably
Claims 4 and 6 are rejected for the same reasons.
Claims 2, 3 and 5 are rejected for being dependent on rejected claims.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyasaka (JP2019069497A) in view of Kulp (US 20070275226 A1) and Qian (US 20160176022 A1)
A polishing pad comprising:
a polishing layer (101) that has a polishing surface for performing a polishing process on an item to be polished (See Para [0018] “The polishing layer 101 is a layer that comes into contact with an object to be polished and performs polishing.”),
wherein the polishing layer includes hollow microspheres that form hollow bodies within the polishing layer (See Para [0024] “In the polishing pad 100, the polishing layer 101 includes a polymer 110 and microspheres 111.”),
but does not explicitly disclose
a cross-section of the polishing layer has an average pore diameter of 10-14µm, in a histogram of pore diameters in the cross-section of the polishing layer where a bin width is 1pm,
a sum of pores that are 25 µm or greater is 5% or less with respect to the total number of pores in the cross-section, and
a sum of areas of the pores in each bin that is 25 µm or greater is 20% or less with respect to a total area of the pores in the cross-section.
However, Miyasaka discloses a polishing pad wherein a cross section of the polishing layer has an average pore diameter of 10-20µm (See Para [0009] “In the polishing pad, the microspheres dispersed in the polyurethane resin may have an average particle size of 10 to 20 μm. In such a polishing pad, the average particle size of the microspheres contained in the polishing layer is 10 μm or more and 20 μm or less, so that the polishing layer can polish the object to be polished more precisely.”).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the range of average pore diameters from 10-20 µm to 10-14 µm. Miyasaka discloses that an average pore size of 20 µm or less is desirable as it increases the precision of the polishing operation undertaken by the pad (See Para [0058] “In the polishing pad 100 manufactured in this manner, the average particle size of the microspheres 111 contained in the polishing layer 101 is controlled to be between 10 μm and 20 μm, and the density of the polishing layer 101 is adjusted to be between 0.6 g/cm NER7 and 0.9 g/cm NER8. This allows the object to be polished more precisely than in a polishing layer in which microspheres 111 with an average particle size larger than 20 μm are dispersed.”), additionally, it has been held that in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 I.
However, Miyasaka as modified does not disclose
in a histogram of pore diameters in the cross-section of the polishing layer where a bin width is 1 µm,
a sum of pores that are 25 µm or greater is 5% or less with respect to the total number of pores in the cross-section, and
a sum of areas of the pores in each bin that is 25 µm or greater is 20% or less with respect to a total area of the pores in the cross-section.
However, Kulp discloses a polishing pad for a chemical mechanical polishing process wherein the polishing pad is porous. Specifically teaching in Para [0024] “Preferably, the polishing pad has a porosity or filler concentration of 0.2 to 70 volume percent. Most preferably, the polishing pad has a porosity or filler concentration of 0.3 to 65 volume percent. Preferably the pores or filler particles have a weight average diameter of 1 to 100 µm. Most preferably, the pores or filler particles have a weight average diameter of 10 to 90 µm. The nominal range of expanded hollow-polymeric microspheres' weight average diameters is 15 to 90 µm Furthermore, a combination of high porosity with small pore size can have particular benefits in reducing defectivity. For example, a pore size of 2 to 50 µm constituting 25 to 65 volume percent of the polishing layer facilitates a reduction in defectivity. Furthermore, maintaining porosity between 40 and 60 percent can have a particular benefit to defectivity.” Kulp additionally discloses the market need for reduced defectivity in Para [0001]- [0005] specifically stating in Para [0005] “There is an ongoing need for additional polishing pads that have superior planarization ability in combination with improved defectivity performance. In particular, there is a desire for polishing pads suitable for polishing oxide/SiN with an improved combination of planarization and defectivity polishing performance.”
While Miyasaka discloses that reducing the average pore size is less than 20 µm results in a pad that allows for more precise polishing (See at least Para [0005] “With the increasing variety and precision of polished objects, there is a demand for polishing pads with high density and small bubble diameters (20 μm or less).” And Para [0007] “In such a polishing pad, the average particle size of the microspheres contained in the polishing layer is 20 μm or less, so that the polishing layer can polish the object to be polished more precisely.”).
Finally, Qian discloses that a histogram charting the diameter of pore sizes in a histogram is a known way of analyzing the average pore sizes of a polishing pad (See figures 4, 4a, 5 and 5a).
It would be obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the average size of pores present in the polishing pad such that in a histogram of pore diameters in the cross-section of the polishing layer where a bin width is 1 µm,
a sum of pores that are 25 µm or greater is 5% or less with respect to the total number of pores in the cross-section, and
a sum of areas of the pores in each bin that is 25 µm or greater is 20% or less with respect to a total area of the pores in the cross-section.
Based on the disclosure of Kulp (cited above) and Miyasaka (cited above) the average size of a pore in a polishing pad is a result effective variable, such that lowering the average pore size increases precision and improves defectivity for the polishing pad. Limiting the pore size of the polishing pad such that:
in a histogram of pore diameters in the cross-section of the polishing layer where a bin width is 1 µm,
a sum of pores that are 25 µm or greater is 5% or less with respect to the total number of pores in the cross-section, and
a sum of areas of the pores in each bin that is 25 µm or greater is 20% or less with respect to a total area of the pores in the cross-section.
Would be a matter of routine experimentation that would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention (See MPEP 2144.05 II).
Regarding Claim 2, Miyasaka as modified discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and suggests but does not explicitly disclose wherein a sum of the pores in each bin that is 30 µm or greater is 3% or less with respect to the total number of pores in the polishing surface, and a sum of areas of the pores in each bin that is 30 µm or greater is 10% or less with respect to a total area of the pores in the polishing surface.
It would be obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the average size of pores present in the polishing pad such that
wherein a sum of the pores in each bin that is 30 µm or greater is 3% or less with respect to the total number of pores in the polishing surface, and a sum of areas of the pores in each bin that is 30 pm or greater is 10% or less with respect to a total area of the pores in the polishing surface.
Based on the disclosure of Kulp (cited above) and Miyasaka (cited above) the average size of a pore in a polishing pad is a result effective variable, such that lowering the average pore size increases precision and improves defectivity for the polishing pad. Limiting the pore size of the polishing pad such that:
wherein a sum of the pores in each bin that is 30 µm or greater is 3% or less with respect to the total number of pores in the polishing surface, and a sum of areas of the pores in each bin that is 30 µm or greater is 10% or less with respect to a total area of the pores in the polishing surface.
Would be a matter of routine experimentation that would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention (See MPEP 2144.05 II).
Regarding Claim 3, Miyasaka discloses all the limitations of claim 1 but does not explicitly disclose wherein the hollow microsphere are derived from unexpanded hollow microspheres having a median diameter (D50) of 6 µm.
However, Miyasaka discloses utilizing microspheres having an average particle size of 5 μm or more and 20 μm or less
See Para [0011] “In order to achieve the above object, a method for manufacturing a polishing pad according to one embodiment of the present invention includes preparing a liquid containing microspheres having an average particle size of 5 μm or more and 20 μm or less and an outer shell made of a thermoplastic resin, and a prepolymer.”
As Miyasaka discloses that heat-expanding microspheres are used to form the pores in the polishing pad (See Para [0005] “In all of the above patent documents, heat-expandable microspheres are largely expanded to obtain a low-density polishing pad.”) and discusses an issue in manufacturing that finding microspheres with a diameter of 20µm or less is difficult (See Para [0005] “However, only pre-expanded microspheres with a bubble diameter of 20 μm or more are commercially available, and heat-expandable microspheres easily expand to a size of 20 μm or more due to the heat of reaction of the resin to be mixed, making it difficult to manufacture polishing pads with bubble diameters of 20 μm or less.”) which Miyasaka seeks to solve (discussed in Para [0011]) as such one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention would find it obvious to utilize smaller unexpanded hollow microspheres such as unexpanded microspheres having a median diameter (D50) of 6µm or less. would assist in lowering the average pore diameter which is desirable as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding Claim 4, Miyasaka discloses:
A manufacturing method for manufacturing a polishing pad including a polishing layer that has a polishing surface for performing a polishing process on an item to be polished (See Para [0018] “The polishing layer 101 is a layer that comes into contact with an object to be polished and performs polishing.”),
wherein the polishing layer includes hollow microspheres that form hollow bodies within the polishing layer (See Para [0024] “In the polishing pad 100, the polishing layer 101 includes a polymer 110 and microspheres 111.”),
the polishing layer is formed by mixing and reacting a urethane bond-containing polyisocyanate compound, a curing agent and unexpanded hollow microspheres (See Para [0025] “The polymer 110 may be a polymer formed by a polymerization reaction of a prepolymer and a curing agent. Such polymers include polyurethane resins. Polyurethane is a preferred polymer 110 because it is readily available, easily processable, and has favorable abrasive properties.” And Para [0026] “The prepolymer can be a compound having an isocyanate group terminal (hereinafter referred to as an isocyanate compound), which is a compound obtained by reacting a polyisocyanate compound with a polyol compound under commonly used conditions, and which contains a polyurethane bond and an isocyanate group in the molecule. Furthermore, other components may be contained in the polyurethane bond-containing isocyanate compound within the range that does not impair the effects of the present invention.”
But does not explicitly disclose
a cross-section of the polishing layer has an average pore diameter of 10-14 µm, in a histogram of pore diameters in the cross-section of the polishing layer where a bin width is 1 µm,
a sum of pores that are 25 µm or greater is 5% or less with respect to the total number of pores in the cross-section, and
a sum of areas of the pores in each bin that is 25 µm or greater is 20% or less with respect to a total area of the pores in the cross-section, and
the hollow microspheres having a median diameter (D50) of 6 µm less.
However, Kulp discloses a polishing pad for a chemical mechanical polishing process wherein the polishing pad is porous. Specifically teaching in Para [0024] “Preferably, the polishing pad has a porosity or filler concentration of 0.2 to 70 volume percent. Most preferably, the polishing pad has a porosity or filler concentration of 0.3 to 65 volume percent. Preferably the pores or filler particles have a weight average diameter of 1 to 100 µm. Most preferably, the pores or filler particles have a weight average diameter of 10 to 90 µm. The nominal range of expanded hollow-polymeric microspheres' weight average diameters is 15 to 90 µm Furthermore, a combination of high porosity with small pore size can have particular benefits in reducing defectivity. For example, a pore size of 2 to 50 µm constituting 25 to 65 volume percent of the polishing layer facilitates a reduction in defectivity. Furthermore, maintaining porosity between 40 and 60 percent can have a particular benefit to defectivity.” Kulp additionally discloses the market need for reduced defectivity in Para [0001]- [0005] specifically stating in Para [0005] “There is an ongoing need for additional polishing pads that have superior planarization ability in combination with improved defectivity performance. In particular, there is a desire for polishing pads suitable for polishing oxide/SiN with an improved combination of planarization and defectivity polishing performance.”
While Miyasaka discloses that reducing the average pore size is less than 20 µm results in a pad that allows for more precise polishing (See at least Para [0005] “With the increasing variety and precision of polished objects, there is a demand for polishing pads with high density and small bubble diameters (20 μm or less).” And Para [0007] “In such a polishing pad, the average particle size of the microspheres contained in the polishing layer is 20 μm or less, so that the polishing layer can polish the object to be polished more precisely.”).
Finally, Qian discloses that a histogram charting the diameter of pore sizes in a histogram is a known way of analyzing the average pore sizes of a polishing pad (See figures 4, 4a, 5 and 5a).
It would be obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the average size of pores present in the polishing pad such that in a histogram of pore diameters in the cross-section of the polishing layer where a bin width is 1 µm,
a sum of pores that are 25 µm or greater is 5% or less with respect to the total number of pores in the cross-section, and
a sum of areas of the pores in each bin that is 25 µm or greater is 20% or less with respect to a total area of the pores in the cross-section.
Based on the disclosure of Kulp (cited above) and Miyasaka (cited above) the average size of a pore in a polishing pad is a result effective variable, such that lowering the average pore size increases precision and improves defectivity for the polishing pad. Limiting the pore size of the polishing pad such that:
in a histogram of pore diameters in the cross-section of the polishing layer where a bin width is 1 µm,
a sum of pores that are 25 µm or greater is 5% or less with respect to the total number of pores in the cross-section, and
a sum of areas of the pores in each bin that is 25 µm or greater is 20% or less with respect to a total area of the pores in the cross-section.
Would be a matter of routine experimentation that would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention (See MPEP 2144.05 II).
Additionally, Miyasaka discloses utilizing microspheres having an average particle size of 5 μm or more and 20 μm or less See Para [0011] “In order to achieve the above object, a method for manufacturing a polishing pad according to one embodiment of the present invention includes preparing a liquid containing microspheres having an average particle size of 5 μm or more and 20 μm or less and an outer shell made of a thermoplastic resin, and a prepolymer.”
As Miyasaka discloses that heat-expanding microspheres are used to form the pores in the polishing pad (See Para [0005] “In all of the above patent documents, heat-expandable microspheres are largely expanded to obtain a low-density polishing pad.”) and discusses an issue in manufacturing that finding microspheres with a diameter of 20µm or less is difficult (See Para [0005] “However, only pre-expanded microspheres with a bubble diameter of 20 μm or more are commercially available, and heat-expandable microspheres easily expand to a size of 20 μm or more due to the heat of reaction of the resin to be mixed, making it difficult to manufacture polishing pads with bubble diameters of 20 μm or less.”) which Miyasaka seeks to solve (discussed in Para [0011]) as such one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention would find it obvious to utilize smaller unexpanded hollow microspheres such as unexpanded microspheres having a median diameter (D50) of 6µm or less. would assist in lowering the average pore diameter which is desirable as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding Claim 5, Miyasaka as modified discloses all the limitations of claim 4 and in addition discloses wherein the reaction is performed under a temperature control so as not to exceed a temperature of 140°C (See Para [0051] “Using such a manufacturing apparatus 200, for example, a prepolymer and microspheres 111 are charged into the first storage tank 201. The average particle size of the microspheres 111 before being introduced into the first storage tank 201 is 5 μm or more and 20 μm or less, and more preferably 5 μm or more and 15 μm or less. The prepolymer may be an isocyanate compound. The second storage tank 202 contains a curing agent. The curing agent is a polyol-based curing agent and/or a polyamine-based curing agent. In order to stabilize the fluidity of each raw material, the first storage tank 201 and the second storage tank 202 are heated to a predetermined temperature. However, in order to minimize expansion of the microspheres 111, the temperature of the first storage tank 201 is preferably set to 50° C. or higher and 80° C. or lower. If the temperature is higher than 80° C., the microspheres 111 may expand.”).
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyasaka (JP 2019069497 A) in view of Kulp (US 20070275226 A1), Shi (US 20190224813 A1) and Qian (US 20160176022 A1).
A polishing method for polishing an item to be polished using a polishing pad and abrasive grains,
wherein the polishing pad includes a polishing layer that has a polishing surface for performing a polishing process on an item to be polished (The polishing layer 101 is formed of a polymer 110 and microspheres 111, See Para [0002] “During polishing, the voids are open on the surface of the polishing pad, and polishing slurry is held in these openings, thereby progressing the polishing of the object to be polished.” Polymer 110 is an abrasive material See Para [0025] “The polymer 110 is the main constituent of the abrasive material. The polymer 110 may be a polymer formed by a polymerization reaction of a prepolymer and a curing agent. Such polymers include polyurethane resins. Polyurethane is a preferred polymer 110 because it is readily available, easily processable, and has favorable abrasive properties.”),
wherein the polishing layer includes hollow microspheres that form hollow bodies within the polishing layer (See Para [0024] “In the polishing pad 100, the polishing layer 101 includes a polymer 110 and microspheres 111.”),
polishing is performed by bringing the item to be polished into contact with the polishing surface of the polishing pad in the presence of the abrasive grains and rotating any one or both of the polishing pad and the polishing item to be polished (See Para [0022] “The polishing pad 100 is rotated by a polishing device while being pressed against an object to be polished, thereby polishing the object.”).
But does not explicitly disclose:
a cross-section of the polishing layer has an average pore diameter of 10-14µm, in a histogram of pore diameters in the cross-section of the polishing layer where a bin width is 1 µm,
a sum of pores that are 25 µm greater is 5% or less with respect to the total number of pores in the cross-section, and
a sum of areas of the pores in each bin that is 25 µm greater is 20% or less with respect to a total area of the pores in the cross-section,
the abrasive grains have diameters of 0.01-0.2 µm,
However, Miyasaka discloses a polishing pad wherein a cross section of the polishing layer has an average pore diameter of 10-20µm (See Para [0009] “In the polishing pad, the microspheres dispersed in the polyurethane resin may have an average particle size of 10 to 20 μm. In such a polishing pad, the average particle size of the microspheres contained in the polishing layer is 10 μm or more and 20 μm or less, so that the polishing layer can polish the object to be polished more precisely.”).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the range of average pore diameters from 10-20 µm to 10-14 µm. Miyasaka discloses that an average pore size of 20 µm or less is desirable as it increases the precision of the polishing operation undertaken by the pad (See Para [0058] “In the polishing pad 100 manufactured in this manner, the average particle size of the microspheres 111 contained in the polishing layer 101 is controlled to be between 10 μm and 20 μm, and the density of the polishing layer 101 is adjusted to be between 0.6 g/cm NER7 and 0.9 g/cm NER8. This allows the object to be polished more precisely than in a polishing layer in which microspheres 111 with an average particle size larger than 20 μm are dispersed.”), additionally, it has been held that in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 I.
However, Miyasaka as modified does not disclose
in a histogram of pore diameters in the cross-section of the polishing layer where a bin width is 1 µm,
a sum of pores that are 25 µm or greater is 5% or less with respect to the total number of pores in the cross-section, and
a sum of areas of the pores in each bin that is 25 µm or greater is 20% or less with respect to a total area of the pores in the cross-section.
However, Kulp discloses a polishing pad for a chemical mechanical polishing process wherein the polishing pad is porous. Specifically teaching in Para [0024] “Preferably, the polishing pad has a porosity or filler concentration of 0.2 to 70 volume percent. Most preferably, the polishing pad has a porosity or filler concentration of 0.3 to 65 volume percent. Preferably the pores or filler particles have a weight average diameter of 1 to 100 µm. Most preferably, the pores or filler particles have a weight average diameter of 10 to 90 µm. The nominal range of expanded hollow-polymeric microspheres' weight average diameters is 15 to 90 µm Furthermore, a combination of high porosity with small pore size can have particular benefits in reducing defectivity. For example, a pore size of 2 to 50 µm constituting 25 to 65 volume percent of the polishing layer facilitates a reduction in defectivity. Furthermore, maintaining porosity between 40 and 60 percent can have a particular benefit to defectivity.” Kulp additionally discloses the market need for reduced defectivity in Para [0001]- [0005] specifically stating in Para [0005] “There is an ongoing need for additional polishing pads that have superior planarization ability in combination with improved defectivity performance. In particular, there is a desire for polishing pads suitable for polishing oxide/SiN with an improved combination of planarization and defectivity polishing performance.”
While Miyasaka discloses that reducing the average pore size is less than 20 µm results in a pad that allows for more precise polishing (See at least Para [0005] “With the increasing variety and precision of polished objects, there is a demand for polishing pads with high density and small bubble diameters (20 μm or less).” And Para [0007] “In such a polishing pad, the average particle size of the microspheres contained in the polishing layer is 20 μm or less, so that the polishing layer can polish the object to be polished more precisely.”).
Finally, Qian discloses that a histogram charting the diameter of pore sizes in a histogram is a known way of analyzing the average pore sizes of a polishing pad (See figures 4, 4a, 5 and 5a).
It would be obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the average size of pores present in the polishing pad such that in a histogram of pore diameters in the cross-section of the polishing layer where a bin width is 1 µm,
a sum of pores that are 25 µm or greater is 5% or less with respect to the total number of pores in the cross-section, and
a sum of areas of the pores in each bin that is 25 µm or greater is 20% or less with respect to a total area of the pores in the cross-section.
Based on the disclosure of Kulp (cited above) and Miyasaka (cited above) the average size of a pore in a polishing pad is a result effective variable, such that lowering the average pore size increases precision and improves defectivity for the polishing pad. Limiting the pore size of the polishing pad such that:
in a histogram of pore diameters in the cross-section of the polishing layer where a bin width is 1 µm,
a sum of pores that are 25 µm or greater is 5% or less with respect to the total number of pores in the cross-section, and
a sum of areas of the pores in each bin that is 25 µm or greater is 20% or less with respect to a total area of the pores in the cross-section.
Would be a matter of routine experimentation that would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention (See MPEP 2144.05 II).
Additionally, Shi discloses a similar abrasive article, with abrasive grains of various sizes including, the abrasive grains have diameters of 0.01-0.2 µm (See Para [0036] “In at least one embodiment, the abrasive particles can include crystalline grains (i.e., crystallites), and may consist entirely of a polycrystalline material made of crystalline grains. In particular instances, the abrasive particles can include crystalline grains having a median grain size of not greater than 1.2 microns. In other instances, the median grain size can be not greater than 1 micron, such as not greater than 0.9 microns or not greater than 0.8 microns or even not greater than 0.7 microns. However, the nanocrystalline alumina particles may have an average crystallite size of not greater than 0.15 microns, such as not greater than 0.14 microns, not greater than 0.13 microns or even not greater than 0.12 microns. According to one non-limiting embodiment, the median grain size of the abrasive particles can be at least 0.01 microns, such as at least 0.05 microns or at least 0.1 microns or at least 0.2 microns or even at least 0.4 microns. It will be appreciated that the median grain size of the abrasive particles can be within a range between any of the minimum and maximum values noted above.”).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the polishing pad to have shaped abrasive grains the abrasive grains have diameters of 0.01-0.2 µm, as doing Shi teaches that doing so provides a higher fidelity to a grinding or polishing process. See Para [0035] “However, a non-shaped abrasive particle will have a generally random arrangement of the surfaces and edges, and generally will lack any recognizable two-dimensional or three dimensional shape in the arrangement of the surfaces and edges around the body. Moreover, non-shaped abrasive particles of the same group or batch generally lack a consistent shape with respect to each other, such that the surfaces and edges are randomly arranged when compared to each other. Therefore, non-shaped grains or crushed grains have a significantly lower shape fidelity compared to shaped abrasive particles.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tyler James McFarland whose telephone number is (571)272-7270. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30AM-5PM (E.S.T), Flex First Friday.
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.
/T.J.M./ Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/DAVID S POSIGIAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723