DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 11-15 in the reply filed on April 23, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on April 23, 2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because figures 7 and 8 do clear show the tornado cleaner and the plasma processor due to the poor quality of the figures.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
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.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishida (US 2017/0008755) in view of des Jardins (US 8,662,352), Zhou (US 2015/0261089) and Ito (US 2021/0307577).
In regards to claim 11, Ishida teaches a liquid dispenser (100) which applies liquid to a workpiece (103), the liquid dispenser comprising:
a nozzle (104) comprising a nozzle hole (104a) (fig. 4-7; para. 91, 94);
a linear motion mechanism (121) with a mounting plate (134) and an intermediate passage section (110) (connector) are connected to the nozzle (fig. 4-7; para. 94, 104-105);
a syringe (107) is coupled to the linear motion mechanism, the syringe comprises a space that is configured to hold liquid (fig. 4-7; para. 92-93, 107); and
an air supply pipe (138, tube assembly) is connected to the inlet port side of the syringe (107) is detachably coupled to the syringe and configured to inject air in the syringe (fig. 4-7; para. 107);
the intermediate passage section (110) includes:
an cylindrical passage (111) with an cylindrical barrel part (111c, elastic member) with an inner space (fig. 4, 6-7; para. 94-95);
an upstream end opening (110a, inlet channel) allows liquid to flow from the space of the syringe into an inner space of cylindrical passage (fig. 4, 6-7; para. 114);
a downstream end opening (110b, outlet channel) allows liquid to flow from the inner space of cylindrical passage to the nozzle hole (fig. 4, 6-7; para. 114);
and a housing surrounding the cylindrical barrel part (111c, elastic member) to provide a pressure chamber (112) (fig. 4, 6-7; para. 95), and
Ishida does not explicitly teach the syringe comprises a plunger.
However, des Jardins a syringe barrel (12) comprising a barrel piston (116) which is moved by pressurized air (114) (fig. 4; col. 7, lines 35-55, col. 11, lines 1-5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the syringe barrel of des Jardins onto the syringe of Ishida because des Jardins teaches it will aid in dispensing the liquid uniformly (col. 2, lines 55-65).
Ishida and des Jardins do not explicitly teach the elastic member is a chemical-resistant rubber tube.
However, Zhou teaches the use of a collapsible liner (131) made of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) within a buffer tank (145) (fig. 1; para. 15, 22).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the PTFE liner of Zhou onto the elastic material of Ishida and des Jardins because PTFE represent a well-known chemically resistant material and Zhou teaches it will possible bubbles (para. 16).
Ishida, des Jardins and Zhou do not explicitly teach a tornado cleaner configured to perform a process of suspending and suctioning foreign substances by supplying pneumatic pressure to a hole formed in an electronic device component and a plasma processor configured to perform a process of plasma processing the electronic device component.
However, Ito teaches an cleaning nozzle (1) comprising an air nozzle (12) and a suction nozzle (13) (tornado cleaner), where the air nozzle blows air across a holding face (101) to dislodge dust from the holding face and the suction nozzle sucks away dust from the holding face which prevent reattach of the dust onto the holding face (fig. 1-5; para. 23-25, 53-54).
Ito teach cleaning nozzle comprises an electrode needles 123 connected to a power supply (71) (plasma processor) to generate a corona discharge (plasma) onto the holding face (fig. 2; para. 36, 56-57).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the cleaning nozzle of Ito onto the liquid dispenser of Ishida, des Jardins and Zhou because Ito teaches it will prevent dust reattachment (para. 11).
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishida, des Jardins, Zhou and Ito as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Tsurusaki (US 5,868,324).
In regards to claim 12, Ishida, des Jardins, Zhou and Ito as discussed, but do not explicitly teach a surface at an outlet of the nozzle hole forms an acute angle with respect to a longitudinal direction of the nozzle hole.
However, Tsurusaki teaches a nozzle (1A/1B) comprising an outlet (5) with an opening (5A) which provides surface at the outlet that forms an acute angle with respect to a longitudinal direction of the opening (fig. 6-8; col. 4, lines 50-67).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the nozzle outlet of Tsurusaki onto the nozzle of Ishida, des Jardins, Zhou and Ito because Tsurusaki teaches it will provide coating along two surfaces (col. 3, lines 8-10).
In regards to claim 13-14, Ishida, des Jardins, Zhou, Ito and Tsurusaki as discussed, where des Jardins teaches a supply coupling (113, tube) connected to a supply fitting (112) of barrel adapter (38) (tube connector), where the supply fitting providing a barb format allows for detaching of the supply coupling (fig. 4; col. 7, lines 35-45).
Jardins teaches the barrel adapter comprises a protrusion (158 syringe coupling portion) coupled to the syringe and provides a hollow portion that allows fluid from the supply coupling into the interior of the syringe.
Jardins teaches an O-ring seal (160) is disposed on an outer circumferential surface of the hollow portion of the protrusion, to provide a seal between the hollow portion and an inner circumferential surface of the syringe (fig. 4; col. 9, lines 20-55).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishida, des Jardins, Zhou and Ito as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Matsunaga (US 2005/0150449).
In regards to claim 12, Ishida, des Jardins, Zhou and Ito as discussed, where Ishida teaches an air pump (108, first pneumatic generator) is connected to a line that is connected to the syringe (107) (fig. 4; para. 92); a pressurizing mechanism (113, second pneumatic generator) is connected to a line that is connected to the air inlet channel of the pressure chamber (fig. 4, 6; para. 95-96); a control unit (114, main controller) controls the air pump and the pressurizing mechanism (fig. 4, 6; para. 99).
Ishida, des Jardins, Zhou and Ito do not explicitly teach a first pressure gauge configured to measure a pressure of the first pneumatic line, a first valve installed on the first pneumatic line, a second pressure gauge configured to measure a pressure of the second pneumatic line, a second valve installed on the second pneumatic line, and control the first valve according to the pressure measured by the first pressure gauge and control the second valve according to the pressure measured by the second pressure gauge.
However, Matsunaga teaches air supply which comprises air regulators (14-1, 14-2) with a pressure gauge are provided inline. Matsunaga teaches three-way solenoid valves (13-1, 13-2) are provided downstream of the air regulator which provide a control of downstream pressure (fig. 1; para. 8, 24, 30, 33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the air regulators and solenoids of Matsunaga onto the air pump and pressurizing mechanism of Ishida, des Jardins, Zhou and Ito because Matsunaga teaches it will aid in dispensing the exact amount of liquid (para. 15).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Binu Thomas whose telephone number is (571)270-7684. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday, 8:00AM-5:00PM PT.
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 Yuan can be reached at 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.
/Binu Thomas/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1717
Prosecution Insights