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 .
Priority
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) / (a)(2) as being anticipated by Hartmann (US 2001/0023862).
With respect to the limitations of claim 1, Hartmann teaches a machining apparatus, comprising: a profile sensor unit (Fig 1, optical detector 5, 0046, 0047) configured to obtain shape information (0015, predetermined contours on the surface of the workpiece can be detected and locally assigned with their contour edges or contour limits by the fall and/or rise of the measured intensity of the reflected light, 0047-0049) about a parent substrate (workpiece 4, 0045); and a laser scan unit (scanner mirrors 2, 3, 0045) configured to direct a laser beam (laser light source 9, Claim 11, 17) onto the parent substrate, a laser beam axis of the laser beam is tilted (tilted laser axis by scanner mirrors 2, 3) to an exposed main surface of the parent substrate (0027, groove-shaped depression; 0029, contoured openings to be cut into a workpiece), and a track of the laser beam on the parent substrate is controllable as a function of the shape information (0036, 0057, this positional information can be used for controlling the deflection of the laser beam 8 for the corresponding laser machining) obtained from the profile sensor unit.
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.
Claims 2-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Hartmann (US 2001/0023862) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Kazuma (JP2008264805). An English machine translation of Kazuma (JP2008264805) is included with the Notice of Reference Cited (PTO-892).
With respect to the limitations of claims 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, Hartman teaches the machining apparatus comprises a control unit (electronic evaluation and control unit 6, 0045) that is configured to process information obtained from the profile sensor unit (0045, claim 1); the control unit (6) is configured control a relative movement between the laser scan unit in a way (scanner mirrors 2, 3, 0045) that the laser beam follows a desired path on a surface of a workpiece comprising the parent substrate (0057, Claim 1, the measuring signals of the optical detector (5) are fed to the electronic evaluation and control unit (6) in dependence on the respective pivoting angle of the scanner mirror(s) (2, 3) and the deflection of the laser beam (8) is controlled during the machining in dependence on the actual position of the contour (17) ascertained in this way for the machining).
Hartman discloses the claimed invention except for the machining apparatus comprises a stage unit; the stage unit is configured to allow rotational and/or linear movement of a wafer composite comprising the parent substrate relative to the profile sensor unit and the laser scan unit; the stage unit is adapted to be reversibly connected with a main surface of the parent substrate; the stage unit is moveable with respect to the laser beam and/or the laser beam is moveable with respect to the stage unit such that the laser beam may follow a track along the circumference of the parent substrate; the machining apparatus comprises a control unit that is configured to process information obtained from the stage unit; the control unit is configured control a relative movement between the laser scan unit and the stage unit in a way that the laser beam follows a desired path on a surface of a wafer composite comprising the parent substrate; the machining apparatus is configured to form a groove in an edge region of a wafer composite comprising the parent substrate.
However, Kazuma discloses the machining apparatus comprises a stage unit (Figs 1-3, chuck table 36, 0014); the stage unit is configured to allow rotational (0014, chuck table 36 configured in this way is rotated by a pulse motor (not shown) located inside the cylindrical member 34) and/or linear movement (X and Y-axis feed direction, 0014) of a wafer composite comprising the parent substrate (semiconductor wafer 20, 0029) relative to the profile sensor unit (imaging means 52, 0026) and the laser scan unit (galvanometer mirrors 7a, 7b, 0024); the stage unit is adapted to be reversibly connected with a main surface of the parent substrate (chuck table 36 is capable of supporting a back surface or front main surface of the wafer 20 in figure 3); the stage unit is moveable (0014) with respect to the laser beam (laser beam irradiation unit 5, 0013) and/or the laser beam is moveable with respect to the stage unit (Fig 2, galvanometer mirrors 7a, 7b, 0024) such that the laser beam may follow a track along the circumference of the parent substrate (galvanometer mirrors 7a, 7b, rotating chuck table, allows for the laser beam to follow a laser processing line along a circumference of the wafer 20); the machining apparatus comprises a control unit (control means 10, CPU 101, 0027) that is configured to process information obtained from the stage unit (chuck table 36, 0016); the control unit (10, 101) is configured control a relative movement between the laser scan unit (7a, 7b) and the stage unit (36) in a way that the laser beam follows a desired path on a surface of a wafer composite comprising the parent substrate (Fig 11, laser-processed grooves 600 are formed in the adhesive film 60 along the dividing grooves 210, 0041); the machining apparatus is configured to form a groove in an edge region of a wafer composite comprising the parent substrate (Figs 4, 11, laser process grooves 600 along dividing grooves 210 that are located along edge regions of the wafer 20) is known in the art.
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the machining apparatus of Hartman having a laser scan unit processing a parent substrate silent to the recited stage unit and wafer material with the machining apparatus comprises a stage unit; the stage unit is configured to allow rotational and/or linear movement of a wafer composite comprising the parent substrate relative to the profile sensor unit and the laser scan unit; the stage unit is adapted to be reversibly connected with a main surface of the parent substrate; the stage unit is moveable with respect to the laser beam and/or the laser beam is moveable with respect to the stage unit such that the laser beam may follow a track along the circumference of the parent substrate; the machining apparatus comprises a control unit that is configured to process information obtained from the stage unit; the control unit is configured control a relative movement between the laser scan unit and the stage unit in a way that the laser beam follows a desired path on a surface of a wafer composite comprising the parent substrate; the machining apparatus is configured to form a groove in an edge region of a wafer composite comprising the parent substrate of Kazuma for the purpose of providing a known moveable stage unit configuration that allows for movement of a wafer composite workpiece in the X, Y, Z and rotational directions that works in combination with a laser scanner to laser machine the workpiece in any desired location quickly and efficiently.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Hartman (US 2001/0023862) in view of Kazuma (JP2008264805) as applied to claims 1 and 2, further in view of Yeh (US 2007/0020873) or Bohme (US 2016/0280580).
With respect to the limitations of claim 5, Kazuma discloses the stage unit is moveable (X and Y-axis feed direction, rotating chuck table 36, 0014) with respect to the laser beam and/or the laser beam is moveable (galvanometer mirrors 7a, 7b, 0024) with respect to the stage unit such that the laser beam may follow a track along of the parent substrate (Figs 4, 11). Hartman in view of Kazuma discloses the claimed invention except for the laser beam may follow a track along the circumference of the parent substrate. However, Yeh discloses the laser beam may follow a track along the circumference of the parent substrate (Fig 2B, groove 226 is formed on the bond surface 222 along the first circumference 221, 0021; 0023, laser cutting process) is known in the art. It would have been for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the machining apparatus of Hartman in view of Kazuma having a scanning laser and rotating stage unit silent to a circumferential laser track with the laser beam may follow a track along the circumference of the parent substrate of Yeh for the purpose of providing a known laser groove configuration that allows a wafer to be created with a desired diameter.
Additionally, Bohme discloses the laser beam may follow a track along the circumference of the parent substrate (Figs 5A-5D, removal line 9, laser 14, 0140, 0141) is known in the art. It would have been for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the machining apparatus of Hartman in view of Kazuma having a scanning laser and rotating stage unit silent to a circumferential laser track with the laser beam may follow a track along the circumference of the parent substrate of Bohme for the purpose of providing a known laser groove configuration that allows a workpiece to be created with a desired diameter.
Response to Amendments
Claims 1-8 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-8 been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant has argued on pages 4-5 about claim 1 that Hartmann fails to disclose the limitations of “a laser beam axis of the laser beam is tilted to an exposed main surface of the parent substrate” because Hartmann teaches scanning a laser beam (such as Hartmann's laser beam 7) along an exposed main surface of a workpiece (such as Hartmann's workpiece 4) in the x and y directions to determine the precise location of a contour to be machined in the exposed surface does not equate to a laser beam axis of the laser beam is tilted to an exposed main surface of the parent substrate, the examiner respectfully disagrees. Referring to figure 1, paragraphs 0032, 0033 and claim 1, the laser is tilted from a vertical axis by the pivotable scanner mirrors during laser machining (0032, 0033, claim 1) to allow for machining of the workpiece along designated locations of the workpiece. For example, the scanner mirror 3 directs the machining laser at an tilted angle from vertical to process the corners of the workpiece. Additionally, as seen in figure 1, the laser is tilted from both a vertical and horizontal axis from scanner mirrors 2 and 3 during laser machining and therefore fully discloses the recited claim limitations.
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 THIEN S TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7745. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday [8:00-4:00].
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, Steven Crabb can be reached at 571-270-5095. 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.
/THIEN S TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761 8/18/2026
Prosecution Insights