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
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.
Claims 1-7, 9-10, and 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Namiki (2013/0337722, previously presented) in view of Shendon (6,024,630).
Regarding Claim 1, Namiki teaches A substrate cleaning apparatus (fig. 3) comprising:
a shaft (Ref. 18, Fig. 3) having an outer body and an interior volume (Fig. 4 shows the shaft (18) having an interior body and interior volume), the shaft having a length in a first direction (Fig. 3 shows a length in a vertical direction); and
a pad carrier assembly (Ref. 20, Fig. 4, [0061]) comprising:
a housing (Ref. 300 & 400, Fig. 4&8) connected to the outer body (18) in a fixed position relative to the outer body of the shaft ([0061] describes the housing are fixed to the shaft (18) via bolts, Fig. 5), the housing having an inner volume (fig. 4-8 shows an interior volume of the housing (300&400));
a piston (Ref. 406, Fig. 8) disposed in the inner volume of the housing (Fig. 8), the piston movable in the first direction based on pressure changes in the interior volume of the shaft ([0070-0074] describes the piston is movable due to pressure from a fluid in the chamber (410) moving the piston vertically);
a pad carrier (Ref. 408, Fig. 8); and
a flexible member (Ref. 420, Fig. 8, [0070]) connected between the housing (400) and the pad carrier (408, Fig. 8), the flexible member configured to extend or retract in the first direction with the pad carrier based on the pressure changes in the interior volume of the shaft ([0070] describes the flexible member (420) can expand and contract in a vertical direction based upon the pressure changes moving the piston up and down).
Namaki fails to explicitly teach a spring connected between the housing and the pad carrier. Shendon teaches a substrate cleaning apparatus with a pad carrier assembly, a housing, and a pad carrier and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor. Shendon further teaches a pad carrier assembly (Fig. 1) comprising a housing (Ref. 146, Fig. 3), a pad carrier (Ref. 104, Fig. 1), a piston (Ref. 170, Fig. 1&3), and a spring (Ref. 172, Fig. 3) connected between a housing and the pad carrier (Fig. 3, [Col. 6, Lines 55-63]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the flexible member, as taught by Namiki, to be a spring, as taught by Namaki, to provide a further function of supporting the piston ([Col. 6, Lines 55-58]) and since such a modification would yield the predictable result of allowing movement of the housing and pad carrier.
Regarding claim 2, Namiki as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and given the teachings of the flexible member of Namiki as a spring as taught by Shendon, Namiki further teaches wherein the piston is configured to apply a force on the pad carrier (408a) in the first direction to stretch the spring in the first direction ([0070]).
Regarding claim 3, Namiki as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and Namiki further teaches a motor configured to rotate the shaft and the pad carrier assembly ([0040] describes rotating the shaft and carrier pad assembly via motor).
Regarding claim 4, Namiki as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and Namiki further teaches a diaphragm (Ref. 404, Fig. 8, [0070&0075]) positioned between the piston (406) and an upper portion of the housing (See annotated Fig. 8 below), the diaphragm configured to create a seal between the interior volume of the shaft and one or more portions of the inner volume of the housing located below the diaphragm (Fig. 4&8 shows the connection of the interior volume of the shaft and the inner volume of the housing forming a seal to move the piston up and down).
PNG
media_image1.png
756
622
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Namiki as modified teaches the limitations of claim 4, as described above, and Namiki further teaches wherein an outer portion of the diaphragm is connected to the housing (Fig. 8, examiner notes connected to is interpreted as linked) and an inner portion of the diaphragm (Ref. 410, Fig. 8) is configured to deform and cause the piston to move in the first direction in response to increased pressure in the interior volume of the shaft ([0074]).
Regarding claim 6, Namiki as modified teaches the limitations of claim 5, as described above, and Namiki further teaches wherein the inner portion of the diaphragm is attached to the piston ([0070&0074] describes the diaphragm (406) is attached to the piston (406)).
Regarding claim 7, Namiki as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and Namiki further teaches a rotary union (ref. 25, Fig. 3) connected to a first end of the interior volume of the shaft ([0040], Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 9, Namiki as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and Namiki further teaches wherein the pad carrier assembly includes a hard stop (Ref. 349, Fig. 8) configured to prevent further movement of the pad carrier in the first direction (fig. 4-7).
Regarding claim 10, Namiki as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and given the teachings of the flexible member of Namiki as a spring as taught by Shendon, Namiki further teaches wherein the spring includes an upper portion (See annotated Fig. 8 below) and a lower portion (See annotated Fig. 8 below), the upper portion connected to the housing (400, Fig. 8), and lower portion connected to the pad carrier (408, Fig. 8).
PNG
media_image2.png
648
721
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, Namiki teaches A substrate cleaning apparatus (fig. 3) comprising:
a shaft (Ref. 18, Fig. 3) having an outer body and an interior volume (Fig. 4 shows the shaft (18) having an interior body and interior volume), the shaft having a length in a first direction (Fig. 3 shows a length in an vertical direction); and
a pad carrier assembly (Ref. 20, Fig. 4, [0061]) comprising:
a housing (Ref. 300 & 400, Fig. 4&8) connected to the outer body in a fixed position relative to the outer body of the shaft ([0061] describes the housing are fixed to the shaft (18) via bolts, Fig. 5), the housing having an inner volume (fig. 4-8 shows an interior volume of the housing (300&400));
a piston (Ref. 406, Fig. 8) disposed in the inner volume of the housing (Fig. 8), the piston movable in the first direction ([0070-0074] describes the piston is movable due to pressure from a fluid in the chamber (410) moving the piston vertically);
a pad carrier (Ref. 408, Fig. 8); and
a diaphragm (Ref. 404, Fig. 8, [0070&0075]) positioned between the piston (406)and an upper portion of the housing (See annotated Fig. 8 below), the diaphragm configured to create a seal between the interior volume of the shaft and one or more portions of the inner volume of the housing located below the diaphragm (Fig. 4&8 shows the connection of the interior volume of the shaft and the inner volume of the housing forming a seal to move the piston up and down); and
a flexible member configured to move the pad carrier downward in response to increased pressure in the interior volume of the shaft (Fig. 8, [0070]).
Namaki fails to explicitly teach a spring configured to move the pad carrier downward in response to increased pressure in the interior volume of the shaft. Shendon teaches a substrate cleaning apparatus with a pad carrier assembly, a housing, and a pad carrier and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor. Shendon further teaches a pad carrier assembly (Fig. 1) comprising a housing (Ref. 146, Fig. 3), a pad carrier (Ref. 104, Fig. 1), a piston (Ref. 170, Fig. 1&3), and a spring (Ref. 172, Fig. 3) configured to move the pad carrier downward in response to increased pressure in the interior volume (Fig. 3, [Col. 6, Lines 55-63]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the flexible member, as taught by Namiki, to be a spring configured to move downward, as taught by Namaki, to provide a further function of supporting the piston ([Col. 6, Lines 55-58]) and since such a modification would yield the predictable result of allowing downward movement of the housing and pad carrier.
PNG
media_image1.png
756
622
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 14, Namiki as modified teaches the limitations of claim 13, as described above, and Namiki further teaches wherein an outer portion of the diaphragm is connected to the housing (Fig. 8, examiner notes connected to is interpreted as linked) and an inner portion of the diaphragm (Ref. 410, Fig. 8) is configured to deform and cause the piston to move in the first direction in response to increased pressure in the interior volume of the shaft ([0074]).
Regarding claim 15, Namiki as modified teaches the limitations of claim 14, as described above, and Namiki further teaches wherein the inner portion of the diaphragm is attached to the piston ([0070&0074] describes the diaphragm (406) is attached to the piston (406)).
Regarding claim 16, Namiki as modified teaches the limitations of claim 15, as described above, and given the teachings of the flexible member of Namiki as a spring as taught by Shendon, Namiki wherein the spring has an upper portion (See annotated Fig. 8 below) and a lower portion (See annotated Fig. 8 below), the upper portion connected to the housing (400, Fig. 8), and lower portion connected to the pad carrier (408, Fig. 8).
PNG
media_image2.png
648
721
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 17, Namiki as modified teaches the limitations of claim 16, as described above, and given the teachings of the flexible member of Namiki as a spring as taught by Shendon, Namiki further teaches wherein the piston is configured to apply a force on the pad carrier (408a) in the first direction to stretch the spring in the first direction ([0070]).
Regarding claim 18, Namiki as modified teaches the limitations of claim 13, as described above, and Namiki further teaches wherein the pad carrier assembly includes a hard stop (Ref. 349, Fig. 8) configured to prevent further movement of the pad carrier in the first direction (Fig. 4-7).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Namiki as modified as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bagnall (0,613,227).
Regarding Claim 8, Namiki as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and Namiki further teaches a table (Ref. 100, Fig. 3) configured to support a substrate (Ref. 101, Fig. 3), the table spaced apart from the pad carrier in the first direction (Fig. 3). Namiki as modified fails to explicitly teach a vacuum table. Bagnall teaches a surface cleaning apparatus with a table shaft and pad carrier assembly and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor. Bagnall teaches a vacuum table (Ref. a, Fig. 1) to allow for secure connection of the substrate to the table ([Pg. 1, Liens 14-17]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the table, as taught by Namiki as modified, to be a vacuum table, as taught by Bagnall, to allow for secure connection of the substrate to the table ([Pg. 1, Liens 14-17]).
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Namiki as modified as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view Swainson (3,081,991).
Regarding Claims 11, Namiki as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, as described above, but fails to explicitly teach the spring is more torsionally rigid than axially rigid. Swainson teaches a supported torsion bar and can be considered analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor to have more torsionally rigid than axially rigid. Swainson teaches a spring (Ref. 14, Fig. 1) that connected to an upper and lower pieces (Ref. 12, fig. 1) is more torsionally rigid than axially rigid ([Col. 2, Lines 36-39] describes the spring allows for a movement in a linear direction). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute the spring, as taught by Namiki as modified, with the spring to be more torsionally rigid than axially rigid, as taught by Swainson, to achieve the predictable result of moving two parts in a linear direction and providing stronger torsional strength ([Col. 2, Lines 35-39]).
Regarding Claims 12, Namiki teaches the limitations of claim 1, as described above, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the spring is at least ten times more torsionally rigid than axially rigid. Swainson teaches a supported torsion bar and can be considered analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor to have more torsionally rigid than axially rigid. Swainson teaches a spring (Ref. 14, Fig. 1) that connected to an upper and lower pieces (Ref. 12, fig. 1) is more torsionally rigid than axially rigid ([Col. 2, Lines 36-39] describes the springs allows for a movement in a linear direction) and that the torsional rigidity is variable depending on the spring ([Col. 2, Lines 47-52]). Therefore It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the spring to have at least ten times more torsionally rigid than axially rigid since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of Namiki would not operate differently with the increase in torsional rigidity since the spring would still allow for movement in a vertical direction. Further, it appears that applicant places no criticality on the range claimed, indicating simply the torsional rigidity can be “e.g. at least ten times greater or at least 100 times greater” and within the claimed ranges (specification [0034-0035]).
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Namiki (2013/0337722) in view of Choi (2009/0305613) and Shendon (US 6024630 A).
Regarding claim 19, Namiki teaches A substrate cleaning system (fig. 3) comprising:
a substrate cleaning apparatus (fig. 3) comprising:
a substrate support (Ref. 14, Fig. 1);
a shaft (Ref. 18, Fig. 3) having an outer body and an interior volume (Fig. 4 shows the shaft (18) having an interior body and interior volume), the shaft having a length in a first direction (Fig. 3 shows a length in an vertical direction); and
a pad carrier assembly (Ref. 20, Fig. 4, [0061]) comprising:
a housing (Ref. 300 & 400, Fig. 4&8) connected to the outer body in a fixed position relative to the outer body of the shaft ([0061] describes the housing are fixed to the shaft (18) via bolts, Fig. 5), the housing having an inner volume (fig. 4-8 shows an interior volume of the housing (300&400));
a piston (Ref. 406, Fig. 8) disposed in the inner volume of the housing (Fig. 8), the piston movable in the first direction ([0070-0074] describes the piston is movable due to pressure from a fluid in the chamber (410) moving the piston vertically);
a pad carrier (Ref. 408, Fig. 8); and
a flexible member (Ref. 420, Fig. 8, [0070]) having an upper portion (See annotated Fig. 8 below) and a lower portion (See annotated Fig. 8 below), the upper portion connected to the housing (400, Fig. 8), and the lower portion connected to the pad carrier (408, Fig. 8); and
adjusting a pressure in the interior volume of the shaft to stretch the flexible member in the first direction and move the pad carrier closer to the substrate support ([0074-0075] describes the adjusting the pressure of the interior volume to stretch the flexible member to move the pad carrier and apply desired pressure to the substrate support).
Namiki fails to explicitly teach a controller configured to adjust a pressure in the interior volume of the shaft to stretch the flexible member in the first direction and move the pad carrier closer to the substrate support. Choi teaches a substrate cleaning apparatus (Fig. 1) with a controller ([0054] describes a flow meter to control flow rate and pressure of air supplied to move the pad carrier into contact) configured to adjust a pressure in an interior volume of a shaft (Ref. 426, Fig. 5) to stretch a flexible member (Ref. 425, Fig. 5) in the first direction and move a pad carrier closer (Ref. 420, Fig. 5) to the substrate support ([0053] describes the flexible member to stretch and vertically extend due to air pressure to move the pad carrier (420) closer to the substrate support (100)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus, as taught by Namiki, to have a controller configured to adjust a pressure in the interior volume of the shaft to stretch the flexible member in the first direction and move the pad carrier closer to the substrate support, as taught by Choi, since such a modification would yield the predictable result of adjusting pressure of the interior volume of the shaft to stretch the flexible member and move the pad carrier in a vertical direction.
Namaki as modified fails to explicitly teach a spring having an upper portion and a lower portion. Shendon teaches a substrate cleaning apparatus with a pad carrier assembly, a housing, and a pad carrier and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor. Shendon further teaches a pad carrier assembly (Fig. 1) comprising a housing (Ref. 148, Fig. 3), a pad carrier (Ref. 104, Fig. 1), a piston (Ref. 170, Fig. 1&3), and a spring (Ref. 172, Fig. 3) having an upper portion (Fig. 3, upper end of spring (172)) and a lower portion (Fig. 3 lower end of spring (172), the upper portion connected to the housing (148, Fig. 3), and the lower portion connected to the pad carrier (104, Fig. 1); and a pressure in the interior volume of the shaft to stretch the flexible member spring in the first direction and move the pad carrier closer to the substrate support (Fig. 3, [Col. 6, Lines 55-63]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the flexible member, as taught by Namiki, to be a spring, as taught by Namaki, to provide a further function of supporting the piston ([Col. 6, Lines 55-58]) and since such a modification would yield the predictable result of allowing movement of the housing and pad carrier.
PNG
media_image2.png
648
721
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 20, Namiki as modified teaches the limitations of claim 19, as described above, and Namiki further teaches a motor configured to rotate the shaft and the pad carrier assembly ([0040] describes rotating the shaft and carrier pad assembly via motor); and
a diaphragm (Ref. 404, Fig. 8, [0070&0075]) positioned between the piston (406) and an upper portion of the housing (See annotated Fig. 8 below), the diaphragm configured to create a seal between the interior volume of the shaft and one or more portions of the inner volume of the housing located below the diaphragm (Fig. 4&8 shows the connection of the interior volume of the shaft and the inner volume of the housing forming a seal to move the piston up and down).
PNG
media_image1.png
756
622
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 19 March, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Claims 1, 13, and 19, the claims have been amended to recite “a spring” thereby changing the scope of the claim and necessitating a new grounds of rejection. Examiner has applied Shendon to the 35 USC 103 rejections above. Shendon teaches a pad carrier assembly (Fig. 1) comprising a housing (Ref. 146, Fig. 3), a pad carrier (Ref. 104, Fig. 1), a piston (Ref. 170, Fig. 1&3), and a spring (Ref. 172, Fig. 3) connected between a housing and the pad carrier (Fig. 3, [Col. 6, Lines 55-63]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the flexible member, as taught by Namiki, to be a spring, as taught by Namaki, to provide a further function of supporting the piston ([Col. 6, Lines 55-58]) and since such a modification would yield the predictable result of allowing movement of the housing and pad carrier.
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 DANA L POON whose telephone number is (571)272-6164. The examiner can normally be reached on General: 6:30AM-3:30PM.
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, David Posigian can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppairmy.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANA LEE POON/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/DAVID S POSIGIAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights