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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species I in the reply filed on 1/16/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that a search for any of Species I, II, or III would return references which would apply to all of the Species and that therefore there is not a serious search burden. This is not found persuasive because Species I, II, and III each have different structural elements and even the common structural elements are arranged differently from one another. Examiner finds that a search for any individual Species would likely not return references for the other two Species and therefore a serious search burden does exist.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 5 and 14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: the recitation of "the polishing fluid delivery arm" should read "a polishing fluid delivery arm" for proper antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-2, 4, 6-10, 12, 15-17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US10737366) in view of Shinozaki (US20190126430).
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses a polishing pad cleaning system (Fig. 13 elements 322 and 332) for a substrate polishing process, the polishing pad cleaning system comprising:
an inner wash ring (Fig. 13 element 322) comprising an inner nozzle (Fig. 13 the bottom opening of element 322), wherein the inner nozzle is configured to be coupled to a second fluid source (11:26-28, the source which connects the cleaning liquid supply pipe to the spray nozzle corresponds to a second fluid source);
and a vacuum ring (Fig. 13 element 332), wherein the vacuum ring forms a vacuum port (Fig. 13 the bottom opening of element 332) configured to be fluidly coupled to a vacuum source (11:40-58, where the source which connects the discharge pipe to the vacuum port corresponds to a vacuum source), wherein:
a conditioning disk (Fig. 13 element 232) is configured to be disposed within the polishing pad cleaning system (Fig. 13) and to condition a polishing pad (2:61-3:8, where "brushing the polishing pad" corresponds to conditioning a polishing pad),
the inner nozzle is configured to loosen debris from conditioning the polishing pad (11:53-58, where "particles 181, which are generated by the cleaning liquid sprayed from the spray nozzle" corresponds to the inner nozzle being capable of loosening debris, which would include debris from conditioning the polishing pad), and the vacuum ring is configured to remove the debris loosened by the inner wash ring (11:53-58).
Lee fails to disclose an outer wash ring comprising outer nozzles, wherein the outer nozzles are configured to be coupled to a first fluid source; the inner wash ring has more than one inner nozzle; the outer nozzles are configured to loosen debris from the substrate polishing process, and the vacuum ring is configured to remove the debris loosened by the outer wash ring.
Shinozaki is also concerned with a polishing pad cleaning system and teaches an outer wash ring (see annotated Fig. 24 below) comprising outer nozzles (Fig. 24 elements E1-E6), wherein the outer nozzles are configured to be coupled to a first fluid source (0114 and 0112); the inner wash ring (see annotated Fig. 24 below) has more than one inner nozzle (Fig. 24 elements E2-1 - E2-6), the outer nozzles are configured to loosen debris from the substrate polishing process (0072), and the vacuum ring is configured to remove the debris loosened by the outer wash ring (0049). It 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 to modify the polishing pad cleaning system of Lee to include an outer wash ring, to provide the inner wash ring with more than one inner nozzle, which would allow for the arrangement of the vacuum ring between the outer wash ring and the inner wash ring, as taught by Shinozaki, because Shinozaki teaches that having a vacuum ring located between an inner and outer wash ring, where each wash ring has multiple nozzles, allows for "forces are balanced with each other by the discharge pressure from the plurality of discharge ports and the suction pressure, a posture of the arm 90c can be stabilized, and a narrow gap between the arm 90c and the table 30A can be stably maintained" (0120) and maintaining the narrow gap means that "removal efficiency of dust and/or debris can be improved" (0117).
PNG
media_image1.png
438
982
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Lee, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and further discloses the inner wash ring is disposed within the vacuum ring (Lee, Fig. 13) and the vacuum ring is disposed within the outer wash ring (Lee, Fig. 13 and Shinozaki, see annotated Fig. 24 above, where the vacuum ring being disposed between the inner and outer wash rings means that the vacuum ring will be disposed within the outer wash ring (i.e. interior to the outer wash ring)).
Regarding claim 4, Lee, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and further discloses the outer wash ring, vacuum ring, and inner wash ring are integrally formed (Shinozaki, see annotated Fig. 24 above).
Regarding claim 6, Lee, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and further discloses the vacuum port is positioned downstream of the outer nozzles and the inner nozzles (Lee, 11:53-58, where the fluid and particles (due to being directly adjacent to the vacuum ring by sharing a common structure) travel from the inner nozzles and outer nozzles to the vacuum port and therefore the vacuum port is downstream from the inner and outer nozzles).
Regarding claim 7, Lee, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and further discloses the polishing pad cleaning system comprises a first zone, a second zone, and a boundary line separating the first zone and the second zone, the boundary line is orthogonal to an edge of the polishing pad, and the outer nozzles are configured to loosen debris in the first zone and the inner nozzles are configured to loosen debris in the second zone (Lee, see annotated Fig. 14 below, where both the inner and outer wash rings are each capable of loosening debris in both the first and second zones).
PNG
media_image2.png
820
720
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Lee, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and further discloses the second fluid source is the same as the first fluid source (Shinozaki, Fig. 25 (specifically pattern 1), 0124).
Regarding claim 9, Lee, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and further discloses the polishing pad cleaning system is configured to surround the conditioning disk (Lee, Figs. 13 and 14).
Regarding claim 10, Lee discloses a conditioning system (Fig. 13 element 200a-3) for conditioning a polishing pad (Fig. 2 element 220, Abstract), the conditioning system comprising:
a conditioning module comprising a conditioning arm and a conditioning head (see annotated Figs. 3 and 3' below where the combination of the conditioning arm and conditioning head corresponds to a conditioning module), wherein the conditioning head is configured to urge a conditioning disk (Fig. 13 element 232) against the polishing pad (6:56-65); and
a polishing pad cleaning system (Fig. 13 elements 322 and 332) coupled to the conditioning arm (see annotated Figs. 3 and 3' below, 6:56-65, where the polishing pad cleaning system is coupled to the conditioning arm through the conditioning head), wherein the polishing pad cleaning system comprises:
a vacuum ring (Fig. 13 element 332) comprising a vacuum port (Fig. 13 the bottom opening of element 332) configured to couple to a vacuum source (11:40-58, where the source which connects the discharge pipe to the vacuum port corresponds to a vacuum source);
and an inner wash ring (Fig. 13 element 322) comprising an inner nozzle (Fig. 13 the bottom opening of element 322) configured to couple to a second fluid source (11:26-28, the source which connects the cleaning liquid supply pipe to the spray nozzle corresponds to a second fluid source).
Lee fails to disclose an outer wash ring comprising outer nozzles configured to be coupled to a first fluid source and the inner wash ring has more than one inner nozzle.
Shinozaki is also concerned with a polishing pad cleaning system and teaches an outer wash ring (see annotated Fig. 24 below) comprising outer nozzles (Fig. 24 elements E1-E6) configured to be coupled to a first fluid source (0114 and 0112) and the inner wash ring (see annotated Fig. 24 above) has more than one inner nozzle (Fig. 24 elements E2-1 - E2-6). It 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 to modify the polishing pad cleaning system of Lee to include an outer wash ring and to provide the inner wash ring with more than one inner nozzle, which would allow for the arrangement of the vacuum ring between the outer wash ring and the inner wash ring, as taught by Shinozaki, because Shinozaki teaches that having a vacuum ring located between an inner and outer wash ring, where each wash ring has multiple nozzles, allows for "forces are balanced with each other by the discharge pressure from the plurality of discharge ports and the suction pressure, a posture of the arm 90c can be stabilized, and a narrow gap between the arm 90c and the table 30A can be stably maintained" (0120) and maintaining the narrow gap means that "removal efficiency of dust and/or debris can be improved" (0117).
PNG
media_image3.png
476
606
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
476
606
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Lee, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 10, as described above, and further discloses the conditioning head is configured to rotate the conditioning disk and the polishing pad cleaning system about a rotational axis of the conditioning head (Lee, 6:56-61 and 11:8-11, where the axis going through "the opposite end" of the "brush-moving portion 164" about which the conditioning head rotates/swings corresponds to a rotational axis of the conditioning head and where the conditioning head is configured to rotate the conditioning disk and the polishing pad cleaning system through the conditioning arm).
Regarding claim 15, Lee, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 10, as described above, and further discloses the vacuum port is positioned downstream of the outer nozzles and the inner nozzles (Lee, 11:53-58, where the fluid and particles (due to being directly adjacent to the vacuum ring by sharing a common structure) travel from the inner nozzles and outer nozzles to the vacuum port and therefore the vacuum port is downstream from the inner and outer nozzles).
Regarding claim 16, Lee discloses a method for conditioning a polishing pad, comprising:
positioning a conditioning disk (Fig. 13 element 232) with respect to a polishing pad (Fig. 2 element 220, Abstract) within a polishing pad cleaning system (Fig. 13 elements 322 and 332 correspond to a polishing pad cleaning system and 6:56-61 and 11:8-11, where rotating/swinging the "brush 162" (equivalent to the conditioning disk 232) "so as to move the brush 162 onto the top surface of the polishing pad 220" corresponds to positioning the conditioning disk with respect to the polishing pad), wherein the polishing pad cleaning system comprises:
an inner wash ring (Fig. 13 element 322) comprising an inner nozzle (Fig. 13 the bottom opening of element 322), wherein the inner nozzle is coupled to a second fluid source (11:26-28, the source which connects the cleaning liquid supply pipe to the spray nozzle corresponds to a second fluid source);
and a vacuum ring (Fig. 13 element 332), wherein the vacuum ring forms a vacuum port (Fig. 13 the bottom opening of element 332) fluidly coupled to a vacuum source (11:40-58, where the source which connects the discharge pipe to the vacuum port corresponds to a vacuum source);
removing the debris from the polishing pad during the substrate polishing process through the vacuum port by creating an underpressure using the vacuum source (11:53-58, where the vacuum port providing suction corresponds to creating an underpressure using the vacuum source);
flowing a fluid from the second fluid source through the inner nozzles to loosen debris from the polishing pad during the substrate polishing process (11:59-67 and 7:8-11, where "deionized water (DIW)" corresponds to a fluid); and
removing the debris from the polishing pad during the substrate polishing process through the vacuum port by creating an underpressure using the vacuum source (11:53-58, where the vacuum port providing suction corresponds to creating an underpressure using the vacuum source).
Lee fails to disclose an outer wash ring comprising outer nozzles, wherein the outer nozzles are configured to be coupled to a first fluid source; the inner wash ring has more than one inner nozzle; and flowing a fluid from the first fluid source through the outer nozzles to loosen debris from the polishing pad during a substrate polishing process.
Shinozaki is also concerned with a polishing pad cleaning system and teaches an outer wash ring (see annotated Fig. 24 above) comprising outer nozzles (Fig. 24 elements E1-E6), wherein the outer nozzles are configured to be coupled to a first fluid source (0114 and 0112); the inner wash ring (see annotated Fig. 24 above) has more than one inner nozzle (Fig. 24 elements E2-1 - E2-6), and flowing a fluid (0114 and 0112, where "pure water (Distilled Ion Water: DIW)" corresponds to a fluid) from the first fluid source through the outer nozzles to loosen debris from the polishing pad during a substrate polishing process (0072). It 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 to modify the method for conditioning a polishing pad of Lee to include an outer wash ring with outer nozzles and to provide the inner wash ring with more than one inner nozzle, which would allow for the arrangement of the vacuum ring between the outer wash ring and the inner wash ring, as taught by Shinozaki, because Shinozaki teaches that having a vacuum ring located between an inner and outer wash ring, where each wash ring has multiple nozzles, allows for "forces are balanced with each other by the discharge pressure from the plurality of discharge ports and the suction pressure, a posture of the arm 90c can be stabilized, and a narrow gap between the arm 90c and the table 30A can be stably maintained" (0120) and maintaining the narrow gap means that "removal efficiency of dust and/or debris can be improved" (0117). It also 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 to modify the method for conditioning a polishing pad of Lee to flow a fluid from the first fluid source through the outer nozzles to loosen debris from the polishing pad during a substrate polishing process, as taught by Shinozaki, because Shinozaki teaches that using this provides “more preferable dressing, that is, regeneration of the polishing surface can be achieved by cleaning of the polishing surface by a fluid pressure of the discharge suction section 34A” (0090).
Regarding claim 17, Lee, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 16, as described above, and further discloses the debris from the substrate polishing process is generated by polishing a substrate using the polishing pad (Lee, 1:24-39).
Regarding claim 19, Lee, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 16, as described above, and further discloses rotating the polishing pad (Lee, 13:64-14:2);
dispensing a polishing fluid onto the polishing pad (Lee, 7:8-11); and
moving the polishing pad cleaning system and the conditioning disk across a surface of the polishing pad (Lee, 6:56-61 and 11:8-11), wherein the underpressure is created using the vacuum source when the vacuum port is outside of a dispersal path of the polishing fluid (Lee, Fig. 2, 13:64-14:13 and 11:53-58, where the area directly under the "slurry supply unit 140" corresponds to a dispersal path of the polishing fluid and the polishing pad cleaning system (shown in Fig. 13 which replaces the similar structure shown in Fig. 2) is shown to be outside of this dispersal path and also the polishing pad cleaning system operates once the polishing fluid is no longer being applied (i.e. after polishing) and therefore the underpressure described in 11:53-58 occurs while the vacuum port is outside of a dispersal path of the polishing fluid).
Claims 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US10737366), in view of Shinozaki (US20190126430), and as evidenced by Benner (US20070087672).
Regarding claim 3, Lee, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 1, as described above, but fails to disclose the outer nozzles, inner nozzles, and vacuum port are each positioned about an arc, semi-circle, or circle. Pursuant of MPEP 2144.04-IV-B, 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 polishing pad cleaning system of Lee, as modified, with regards to a desired shape (in this case, making the outer nozzles, inner nozzles, and vacuum port each be positioned about an arc, semi-circle, or circle) in adapting the polishing pad cleaning system for a particular application, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art. Examiner notes that Applicant’s specification fails to provide criticality for any of the claimed arrangement shapes and that one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to change the shape of the polishing pad cleaning system of Lee, as modified, as arranging outer nozzles, inner nozzles, and a vacuum port each in a circular shape is known as evidenced by Benner, where Fig. 3 of Benner shows outer nozzles, inner nozzles, and a vacuum port each arranged in a circular shape.
Regarding claim 13, Lee, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 10, as described above, but fails to disclose the outer nozzles, inner nozzles, and vacuum port are each positioned about an arc, semi-circle, or circle. Pursuant of MPEP 2144.04-IV-B, 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 conditioning system of Lee, as modified, with regards to a desired shape (in this case, making the outer nozzles, inner nozzles, and vacuum port each be positioned about an arc, semi-circle, or circle) in adapting the polishing pad cleaning system for a particular application, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art. Examiner notes that Applicant’s specification fails to provide criticality for any of the claimed arrangement shapes and that one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to change the shape of the conditioning system of Lee, as modified, as arranging outer nozzles, inner nozzles, and a vacuum port each in a circular shape is known as evidenced by Benner, where Fig. 3 of Benner shows outer nozzles, inner nozzles, and a vacuum port each arranged in a circular shape.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US10737366), in view of Shinozaki (US20190126430), and in further view of Ho et al. (KR100567891B1), attached as a PDF and hereinafter referred to as Ho.
Regarding claim 11, Lee, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 10, as described above, but fails to disclose the conditioning head is configured to rotate the conditioning disk about a rotational axis of the conditioning head and the polishing pad cleaning system remains stationary in relation to the rotational axis of the conditioning head.
Ho is also concerned with a conditioning system and teaches the conditioning head (Fig. 7 element 11, excluding element 11a) is configured to rotate the conditioning disk (Fig. 7 element 11a) about a rotational axis (the vertical axis defined by and going longitudinally through element 11b) of the conditioning head (Abstract)the polishing pad cleaning system remains stationary in relation to the rotational axis of the conditioning head (page 12 fourth paragraph from the bottom). Pursuant of MPEP 2144.06-II, it has been held obvious to substitute equivalents for the same purpose. Lee, as modified, discloses the invention except that the movement structure only causes a conditioning disk to swing instead of the movement structure causing the conditioning disk to swing and rotate about a rotational axis of the conditioning head and the connection between the polishing pad cleaning system and the conditioning head would cause the polishing pad cleaning system to rotate in relation to the rotational axis instead of remaining stationary. Ho shows that a movement structure which causes a conditioning disk to swing and rotate is an equivalent structure known in the art (i.e. both structures cause a conditioning disk to condition a polishing pad) and that a connection between the polishing pad cleaning system and the conditioning head where the polishing pad cleaning system remains stationary relative to a rotational axis of the conditioning head is also an equivalent structure known in the art (i.e. both structures connect a polishing pad cleaning system to a conditioner head to allow the polishing pad cleaning system to spray cleaning fluid onto the polishing pad). Therefore, because these two movement structures and two connection types were art-recognized equivalents at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to substitute a movement structure which causes both swinging and rotation for a movement structure which only causes swinging and to substitute a connection structure where the polishing pad cleaning system remains stationary in relation to a rotational axis of the conditioning head for a connection structure where the polishing pad cleaning system would rotate in relation to a rotational axis of the conditioning head.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US10737366), in view of Shinozaki (US20190126430), and in further view of Shen et al. (US20210129288), hereinafter Shen.
Regarding claim 18, Lee, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 17, as described above, but fails to disclose flowing the fluid from the first fluid source, removing the debris from the polishing pad, flowing the fluid from the second fluid source, and removing the debris from polishing pad are performed simultaneously while polishing a substrate using the polishing pad. Examiner notes that the limitations of claim 18 essentially claim in-situ conditioning, where the conditioner conditions at the same time the substrate is being polished, and that combining the teaching of in-situ conditioning into the disclosure of Lee, as modified, would yield the claim limitations of claim 18.
Shen is also concerned with a method for conditioning a polishing pad and teaches in-situ conditioning (0014-0015). It 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 to modify the method of Lee, as modified, to make the conditioning be in-situ conditioning because Shen teaches that in-situ conditioning "provides advantages of improved throughput and removal rate stability" (0015).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US10737366), in view of Shinozaki (US20190126430), and in further view of Polyak et al. (US20050272352), hereinafter Polyak.
Regarding claim 20, Lee, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 19, as described above, and further discloses a polishing fluid delivery arm (Fig. 2 element 140).
Lee, as modified, fails to disclose moving the polishing fluid delivery arm across the polishing pad such that the polishing fluid is applied at several locations of the polishing pad.
Polyak is also concerned with a method for conditioning a polishing pad and teaches moving the polishing fluid delivery arm (Fig. 2 element 152) across the polishing pad such that the polishing fluid is applied at several locations of the polishing pad (0049). It 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 to modify the method of Lee, as modified, to move the polishing fluid delivery arm across the polishing pad such that the polishing fluid is applied at several locations of the polishing pad, as taught by Polyak, because Polyak teaches that moving the polishing fluid delivery arm across the polishing pad such that the polishing fluid is applied at several locations of the polishing pad allows for controlled distribution of the polishing fluid across the polishing pad and that when "the distribution of polishing fluid interfacing with the substrate on the polishing material 128 is changed, the rate of material removal (e.g., polishing) may be controlled as desired" (0049).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CALEB A HOLIZNA whose telephone number is (571)272-5659. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00-4:30.
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, Monica Carter can be reached at 571-272-4475. 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.
/C.A.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/MONICA S CARTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723