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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoshi et al (US 20150240380) in view of Deng (CN 208562590 U), an English computer translation (CT) is provided, and Hoshi et al (US 2003/0070605).
Hoshi et al teaches an apparatus for manufacturing a single crystal by growing a single crystal according to a Czochralski method, the apparatus comprising: a main chamber 2 configured to house a crucible 7/8 configured to accommodate a raw-material melt 6, and a heater 10 configured to heat the raw-material melt; a pulling chamber 3 continuously provided at an upper portion of the main chamber and configured to accommodate a single crystal grown 4 and pulled; and a cooling cylinder 15 extending from at least a ceiling portion of the main chamber 2 toward a surface of the raw material melt 6 to surround the single crystal 4 being pulled, the cooling cylinder being configured to be forcibly cooled with a coolant (cooling medium), wherein the apparatus comprises a first auxiliary cooling cylinder 17 fitted inside of the cooling cylinder; and a second auxiliary cooling cylinder (shielding member 14) connected to an outside of the first auxiliary cooling cylinder from a lower end (Fig 2; [0060]-[0075]). Hoshi et al teaches a top surface of the secondary auxiliary cooling cylinder is 0 mm or more to 1.0 mm or less (Fig 2 shows the top surface of the secondary auxiliary cooling cylinder 14 in contact with the bottom of the cooling cylinder 15 which clearly suggests a gap of 0 mm).
Hoshi et al does not explicitly teach a second auxiliary cooling cylinder threadedly connected to an outside of the first auxiliary cooling cylinder from a side of a lower end.
In a crystal growth apparatus, Deng teaches a water cooling jacket 20 and a heat conducting accessory 21 (second auxiliary cooling cylinder) fixedly connected to the bottom end of the water-cooling jacket 20 and extending downward for a portion of its length, wherein thermally conductive accessory 21 includes a first thermally conductive tube 211 and a second thermally conductive tube 212 that are sleeved together, wherein a portion of the bottom end of the first thermally conductive tube 211 also extends to cover the bottom surface of the second thermally conductive tube 212; and part of the inner wall of the first heat-conducting tube 211 is fixedly connected to the outer wall of the water-cooling jacket 20, that is, connected to the outer wall of the tube body 202, and the top end surface of the second heat-conducting tube 212 is connected to the bottom end surface of the water-cooling jacket 20, that is, connected to the bottom end surface of the tube body 202; alternatively, part of the outer wall of the first heat-conducting tube 211 is connected to the inner wall of the water-cooling jacket, the top end surface of the second heat-conducting tube 212 is connected to the bottom end surface of the water-cooling jacket 20, and part of the bottom end of the first heat-conducting tube 211 also extends to cover the bottom surface of the second heat-conducting tube 212; and the heat conducting tubes are connected by screwing to the water cooling jacket (CT [0080]-[0095], Fig 2A, 2B). Deng teaches a thermal conductive accessory is provided below the water-cooling jacket, thermal conductive accessories with different heat transfer properties are formed by different shape designs and selection of thermal conductive materials, thereby achieving precise control of the temperature above the liquid surface improving the quality and production efficiency of the produced silicon single crystal rods (CT [0099]). Deng also teaches the thermal conductive accessory thermal conductive accessory 21 extending from the bottom surface of the cooling cylinder, which clearly suggests a gap between the bottom surface cooling cylinder and the top surface of the second auxiliary cooling cylinder is 0 mm (Fig 2B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Hoshi et al by providing a second auxiliary cooling cylinder threadedly connected to an outside of the first auxiliary cooling cylinder from a side of a lower end, as taught by Deng, to connect the shielding element 14 to auxiliary cooling cylinder 17.
The combination of Hoshi et al and Deng does not explicitly teach a material for the first auxiliary cooling cylinder and the second auxiliary cooling cylinder is a graphite material.
In a Czochralski crystal growth apparatus, Hoshi et al (‘605) teaches a thick heat-shielding member 14 is provided at the end of the auxiliary cooling member 13b having a shape tapered from a position near the lower end of the cooling cylinder 11 toward the downward direction, and a material of the heat-shielding member 14/14c may be, in particular, one showing excellent heat resistance and having high heat conductivity and, for example, the materials exemplified as the material of the auxiliary cooling member 13b, i.e., graphite (Fig 3-4; [0050]-[0065]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the combination of Hoshi et al (‘380) and Deng by using graphite as the material for the first auxiliary cooling cylinder and the second auxiliary cooling cylinder, as taught by Hoshi et al (‘605) because the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended purpose is prima facie obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
Referring to claim 3, the combination of Hoshi et al (‘380), Deng and Hoshi et al (‘605) teaches second auxiliary cooling cylinder 14 lower than a first auxiliary cooling cylinder 17 (Hoshi ‘380 Fig 2).
Claim(s) 5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoshi et al (US 20150240380) in view of Deng (CN 208562590 U), an English computer translation (CT) is provided, and Hoshi et al (US 2003/0070605), as applied to claims 1 and 3 above, and further in view of Kobayashi et al (WO 2020188947), US 2022/0136130 is used as an accurate translation.
The combination of Hoshi et al (‘380), Deng and Hoshi et al (‘605) teaches all of the limitations of claim 5, as discussed above, except a diameter enlargement member which is fitted inside of the first auxiliary cooling cylinder, so as to bring the first auxiliary cooling cylinder into tightly contact with the cooling cylinder.
In a crystal growth apparatus, Kobayashi et al teaches an auxiliary cooling cylinder 19 and the diameter-enlargement member 20, thereby enlarging the diameter of the auxiliary cooling cylinder 19, wherein the auxiliary cooling cylinder 19 surely tightly comes into close contact with the cooling cylinder 12 (‘130 [0080]-[0100] Figs 1-4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the combination of Hoshi et al (‘380), Deng and Hoshi et al (‘605) by providing a diameter enlargement member which is fitted inside of the first auxiliary cooling cylinder, as taught by Kobyashi et al, so as to bring the first auxiliary cooling cylinder into tightly contact with the cooling cylinder.
Referring to claim 7, see remarks above regarding claim 5.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3, 5 and 7 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
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 MATTHEW J SONG whose telephone number is (571)272-1468. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM-6PM.
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, Kaj Olsen can be reached at 571-272-1344. 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.
MATTHEW J. SONG
Examiner
Art Unit 1714
/MATTHEW J SONG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1714
Prosecution Insights