DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on (12/20/2023), is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims (1-20) are pending and being examined.
Claim Interpretation
Claim interpretation is not repeated but continues to be valid.
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 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, 3, 8-10 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al (KR 10-2022-0022449) in view of Herbert Josef Henrich (US 20020070164)
Takahashi et al disclose a substrate treating apparatus (Fig 4)
comprising a treating bath providing space for receiving a substrate treating solution for treating substrates (821).
a treating solution source (Fig 2, 832) providing the substrate treating solution into the treating bath such that the substrates are immersed and treated in the substrate treating solution; and
a bubble generation module (840, 841) connected to the treating bath and generating bubbles in the substrate treating solution by injecting gas.
Regarding flow direction control module being adjacent to a bubble generation hole and disposed in a direction equivalent to gas for bubble, it is noted that any plate like 861 would be a flow direction control module and its orientation would determine the deflection of bubbles reaching it.
Takahashi however does not disclose flow direction module being adjacent to a bubble generation hole and disposed in a direction equivalent to gas for bubble.
Herbert Josef Henrich discloses a bubble generation system (Fig 2) where flow direction module (2) is adjacent to bubble generation holes (in 1) and is equivalent to a direction of gas bubbles.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application to have a flow direction module as claimed in Takahashi in order to orient the bubble in desired direction for useful effect.
Regarding claim 2 the orientation of the bubbler as in Fig 4, 841 or in Henrich would control the flow direction.
Regarding claims 3-4 the flow direction control module in Takahashi et al or Henrich is a motion less structure and movement direction of the bubbles would change when contacting restraining plate 861 or module.
Regarding claims 8-10 and 14, number of bubbles would be controlled by nitrogen supply (844) to the bubbler.
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al (KR 10-2022-0022449) in view of Herbert Josef Henrich (US 20020070164) and (Takeaki et al (JP 201849923) or Masanobu Okata (JP 2003071255)).
As disclosed above, Takahashi et al disclose a substrate treating apparatus (Fig 4) and regarding these claims, the flow control direction module is disclosed through bubbler 841 and restraining plate 861, however Takeaki et al discloses this more explicitly in Fig 6 where bubbler 80 directs bubbles towards a tilted surface to control their direction (Abstract).
Similarly, Masanobu Okata discloses flapper plated 6 to control the direction of bubbles generated from diffuser 5 (Fig 3-5 and Abstract).
It would have been obvious to locate number and location of bubbler and capability of direction control for process optimization before the filing date of the application.
Regarding claims 5-7 plurality of bubblers with the capability of direction control are disclosed in Takeaki et al and Masanobu Okata. Number of bubbles could be adjustable according to need since supply is disclosed to be controllable.
Regarding claims 2-4 Takeaki et al and Masanobu Okata disclose their limitations very explicitly in terms of direction and supply control. Therefore, their rejection is included additionally in this section.
Claims 11-13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al (KR 10-2022-0022449) in view of Herbert Josef Henrich (US 20020070164) and Iwaki et al (KR 10-2010-0006586).
Regarding claims 11-13 and 20 limitations of these claims like size of bubbles and number of bubbles or gas injection speed are directed to functional limitations. The apparatus of Takahashi et al discloses control of the supply of gas injection for bubble formation and is therefore capable of controlling any parameters related to bubbles.
However, Iwaki et al disclose (Para 11 and 103-105) controlling bubble parameters explicitly as related to bubble size and relation to shear, which would be caused due to motion of treating liquid in Takahashi.
Since supply of treating liquid and bubble gas is controllable by controller 600, size of the bubbles could be optimized easily and such optimization would have been obvious before the filing date of this application.
Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al (KR 10-2022-0022449) in view of Herbert Josef Henrich (US 20020070164) and Choi et al (KR 20220076279).
Regarding claim 15 use of additional substrate treating apparatus is not explicitly disclosed by Takahashi et al.
Choi et al disclose first and second liquid processing apparatus (Abstract) and a transfer unit (130). The processing units are configured to do different processes.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of this application to have plurality of liquid processing units for plurality of sequential processes.
Regarding claim 16 first processing unit is batch type and second single substrate type (Abstract)
Claims 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al (KR 10-2022-0022449) in view of Herbert Josef Henrich (US 20020070164), Choi et al (KR 20220076279) and Masanobu Okata (JP 2003071255).
Limitations of Claim 18 are disclosed by Takahashi et al in view of Choi et al as disclosed above except speed of bubbles.
It is noted that, as discussed above parameters related to bubbles are functional limitations.
Masanobu Okata as discussed above, disclose the action of flapper in controlling speed of bubbles regarding discussion of Fig 4.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of this application to have speed control of bubbles to control processing speed.
Claims 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al (KR 10-2022-0022449) in view of Herbert Josef Henrich (US 20020070164), Choi et al (KR 20220076279) and Iwaki et al (KR 10-2010-0006586).
Limitation of claim 19 regarding bubble size as discussed above is a functional limitation.
However, Iwaki et al disclose (Para 11 and 103-105) controlling bubble parameters explicitly as related to bubble size and relation to shear, which would be caused due to motion of treating liquid in Takahashi.
Since supply of treating liquid and bubble gas is controllable by controller 600, size of the bubbles could be optimized easily and such optimization would have been obvious before the filing date of this application.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Jong Soo Kim US 7393431 discloses a liquid etching apparatus using bubble generator to assist etch process.
Oh Hak Kyun (KR 20180076157) discloses a vertical flow direction control module (530) being adjacent to holes in plate 510.
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 RAM N KACKAR whose telephone number is (571)272-1436. The examiner can normally be reached 09:00 AM-05:00 PM.
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, Parviz Hassanzadeh can be reached at 5712721435. 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.
RAM N. KACKAR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1716
/RAM N KACKAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights