DETAILED ACTION
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on 08/28/25. As directed by the amendment: claims 1 and 17 have been amended; and no claims has been cancelled nor added. Thus, claims 1-19 are presently pending in this application.
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.
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHI et al. (CN 111604581) in view of TAKEDA et al. (WO2018216281).
With regard to claim 17, Shi teaches a processing method of a laser processing apparatus (“laser processing equipment”, pg. 2, ln. 43) configured for processing multiple targets (“each point”) at a substrate (“material to be processed”; “the part of the material to be processed, which is covered by the working visual field of the focusing lens, comprises all the points to be processed in the target pattern”, cl. 5).
It is submitted that as the claim is directed toward a method, the structural limitations included within the claim are provided limited patentable weight. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Shi teaches the laser processing apparatus (“laser processing equipment”, pg. 2, ln. 43) configured comprises a controller (“controller”, pg. 7, ln. 30) coupled to a laser generator (“a collaborative method of laser machining”, cl. 1), a stage (“mechanical motion platform”, cl. 1), and a galvo mirror module (“high-speed galvanometer”, pg. 5, ln. 15), with the galvo mirror module (“high-speed galvanometer”, pg. 5, ln. 15) has a scanning range along the second axis (“the high-speed galvanometer, the diffraction deflection element and the like adjust the processing angle and the processing position of the emergent light spot, and the accuracy of light spot processing can be ensured only within the visual field limitation of the focusing lens, so that the moving range of the focused light spot, namely the laser processing size range, is limited”, pg. 5, ln. 15-17), and the controller (“controller”, pg. 7, ln. 30) includes an arithmetic logic unit (“other data processing chip”, pg. 7, ln. 30; “other data Processing chip for executing program codes stored in the memory 1 or Processing data, such as a cooperation program for performing laser Processing.”); wherein the processing method of the laser processing apparatus comprises steps as follows: the multiple targets (“each point”) are stratified into multiple beam path layers by the arithmetic logic unit according to the scanning range of the galvo mirror module along the second axis (“the high-speed galvanometer, the diffraction deflection element and the like adjust the processing angle and the processing position of the emergent light spot, and the accuracy of light spot processing can be ensured only within the visual field limitation of the focusing lens, so that the moving range of the focused light spot, namely the laser processing size range, is limited.”, pg. 5, ln. 15-17; “decomposing the target pattern into a motion path of the processing beam and a motion path of the mechanical motion platform according to the point to be processed on the target pattern. Specifically, motion path planning and motion system control are realized through a point-by-point decomposition method, so that the machining light beam and the mechanical motion platform can move in a matched mode….”, pg. 4, ln. 14-17; “The key point of the invention is that the target graph to be processed is divided into two or more sets of motion tracks by a vector, the two or more sets of motion tracks comprise motion paths of one or more processing light beams and motion paths of one or more mechanical motion platforms, and the motion paths are respectively handed to corresponding motion systems to carry out relatively independent motion, the motion control synchronous frequency of the two or more sets of motion systems can have a determined mathematical relationship, and data communication and motion compensation are carried out at a specific frequency.”, ), each beam path layer including multiple said targets (“the planned speed vector of each point to be processed should point to the next coordinate point of the target figure to be processed, so as to ensure the continuity of the matching processing movement.”, pg. 4, ln. 23-25); the stage is controlled by the controller to move along the first axis forwardly and backwardly at a constant velocity repeatedly (“determining the moving speeds of the processing light beam and the mechanical motion platform according to the movement path of the processing light beam and the coordinate information of the points to be processed on the movement path of the mechanical motion platform, wherein the speed vectors of the processing light beam and the mechanical motion platform on each point to be processed point and point to the next point to be processed. Specifically, the coordinate position information and the velocity vector of each point to be processed on the motion path of the processing beam and the mechanical motion platform are known quantities set in advance….”, pg. 4, ln. 18-22), wherein a forward movement is defined as a movement of the stage moving along the first axis forwardly and a backward movement is defined as a movement of the stage moving along the first axis backwardly; during each forward movement or each backward movement of the stage that moves along the first axis at the constant velocity (FIG. 5 illustrates a forward movement from P0 to P1, and thereafter to P2), the laser generator and the galvo mirror module are controlled by the controller according to a respective one of the beam path layers (“a cooperative method, a system, equipment and a medium for laser processing, which can control a processing light beam and a mechanical motion platform to do cooperative motion, thereby reducing processing errors.”, pg. 3, ln. 48-49), wherein a time interval and a spaced interval between each consecutive two of the targets of each beam path layer are determined by the arithmetic logic unit according to the constant velocity of the stage (“motion platform”) moving along the first axis; the laser generator is controlled by the controller according to the time interval to shoot a laser beam and the galvo mirror module is controlled by the controller according to the spaced interval (“each point to be processes point to the next point to be processed”) to deflect the laser beam within the time interval to adjust a focusing position of the laser beam at the substrate (“determining the moving speeds of the processing light beam and the mechanical motion platform according to the movement path of the processing light beam and the coordinate information of the points to be processed on the movement path of the mechanical motion platform, wherein the speed vectors of the processing light beam and the mechanical motion platform on each point to be processed point to the next point to be processed” (emphasis added), pg. 2, ln. 48-50; “the coordinate position information and the velocity vector of each point to be processed on the motion path of the processing beam and the mechanical motion platform are known quantities set in advance, the velocity vector information of each point to be processed needs to be set, the acceleration vector information of each point to be processed is also included, and the direction of the acceleration vector is consistent with the direction of the resultant force. And the planned speed vector of each point to be processed should point to the next coordinate point of the target figure to be processed, so as to ensure the continuity of the matching processing movement.”, pg. 4, ln. 21-25).
Shi does not explicitly teach the limitation of “a first axis of the laser processing apparatus and a second axis of the laser processing apparatus intersecting with each other are defined in a horizontal datum plane “ however, Takeda which is from the same field of endeavor directed toward a laser machining device teaches the aforementioned limitation, namely that a laser scanning device which comprises a Galvano scanner positions a laser beam in respective X-axis and Y-axis directions (pg. 3, ln. 23-25; “The X-axis servomotor 11 is mounted on the bed 10, and the rotational motion of the X-axis servomotor 11 is converted into the linear motion of the X-axis nut 14 by the X-axis ball screw 12.”, pg. 3, ln. 38-43; “A Y-axis servo motor 18 is mounted on the Y-axis saddle 13, and the rotational motion of the Y-axis servo motor 18 is converted into a linear motion of the Y-axis nut 21 by the Y-axis ball screw 19.”, pg. 3, ln. 44-49).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device in the Shi reference, such that “a first axis of the laser processing apparatus and a second axis of the laser processing apparatus intersecting with each other are defined in a horizontal datum plane”, as suggested and taught by Takeda, for the purpose of providing a laser beam that can be positioned two-dimensionally (Takeda: pg. 3, ln. 23-25).
With regard to claim 18, although Shi does not explicitly teach said laser processing apparatus comprises a position sensor coupled to the controller to detect a position of the stage along the first axis and to transmit a detecting signal to the controller; the time interval and the spaced interval are calibrated by the controller according to the detecting signal for reducing deviation, Takeda is cited here for teaching the claimed position sensor, namely: “For the positioning of the XY table 9 according to the first embodiment, a linear encoder is used as a control position sensor. In the XY table 9, two linear encoders are used as control position sensors for measuring the position in the drive axis direction for each drive axis.” (pg. 3, ln. 50-51).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the time interval and spaced interval which are calibrated by the controller in the Shi reference, to include the location of the claimed position sensor, as suggested and taught by Takeda, for the purpose of providing precise control of the stage (Takeda: pg. 3, ln. 50-51)
With regard to claim 19, Shi teaches the stage (“mechanical motion platform”, cl. 1) is controlled by the controller (“controller”, pg. 7, ln. 30) according to each beam path layer to move along the second axis (FIG. 5 illustrates a first axis for movement form position P0 to P1, and a second axis for movement from position P1 to P2) according to a position of the beam path layer relative to the substrate along the second axis (“The laser processing cooperation method changes the processing track from single processing light beam movement or moving platform movement into the two cooperation movements, accelerates the processing speed, and in the processing process, the processing light beam and the mechanical movement platform do not need to wait each other, saves the starting and stopping time of the mechanical movement in the splicing process, and improves the processing efficiency.”, pg. 3, ln. 32-34).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/28/25 have been fully considered and are addressed hereafter. Various comments are presented at pgs. 6-7 regarding the subject invention, including: “the present patent application relates to a processing method of laser processing apparatus, and more particularly a processing method for forming through silicon vias (TSV) or through glass vias (TGV) in the field of semiconductor technology…”; however, it is submitted that the independent claim does not provide recitations related to the aforementioned limitations. Additionally, at pg. 11 of the Applicant’s response it is asserted that: “With reference to page 12, lines 2 to line 21 of the specification of the present patent application, to process a substrate with 594,550 targets, if the constant velocity of the stage moving along the first axis is 200 millimeters per second (mm/s), the scanning range of the galvo mirror module along the second axis is 2 millimeters (mm), the reacting time of the galvo mirror module is 500 micro seconds (us), and an amount of the beam path layers is 252, the total processing time will be 695.155 seconds (s), and the laser processing apparatus will be able to process 855 targets per second. If the constant velocity of the stage moving along the first axis is 300 millimeters per second (mm/s), the scanning range of the galvo mirror module along the second axis is 2 millimeters (2 mm), the reacting time of the galvo mirror module is 350 micro seconds (us), and the amount of the beam path layers is 252, the total processing time will be 497.036 seconds (s), and the laser processing apparatus will be able to process 1197 targets per second. If the constant velocity of the stage moving along the first axis is 300 millimeters per second (mm/s), the scanning range S of the galvo mirror module along the second axis is 3 millimeters (3 mm), the reacting time of the galvo mirror module is 350 micro seconds (us), and an amount of the beam path layers is 192, the total processing time will be 378.694 seconds (s), and the laser processing apparatus will be able to process 1570 targets per second. It is respectfully submitted that the aforementioned features upon which applicant relies are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Furthermore, with regard to Applicant’s comments regarding the “multiple beam path layers” limitation, FIG. 6 illustrates layers L1, L2 … LN on the right side of the figure with the resultant machined substrate 80 after multiple “layers” processing has occurred in which each layer is in essence a distinct path of targets P being operated upon with the figure on the left side of FIG. 6 being the resultant substrate 80 after processing has been completed. As indicated in the prior art rejection, the “two or more sets of motion tracks” as indicated above teach this limitation. With regard to the Applicant’s arguments that the mechanical movement platform is at a constant velocity, it is submitted that in addition to the arguments detailed above, the citation explicitly teaches: “the coordinate position information and the velocity vector of each point to be processed on the motion path of the processing beam and the mechanical motion platform are known quantities set in advance, the velocity vector information of each point to be processed needs to be set, the acceleration vector information of each point to be processed is also included, and the direction of the acceleration vector is consistent with the direction of the resultant force.”
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 JOSEPH W ISKRA whose telephone number is (313) 446-4866. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 09:00-17:00 EST.
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, IBRAHIME ABRAHAM can be reached on 571-270-5569. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/JOSEPH W ISKRA/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761