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 without traverse of Group I, claims 1-10 in the reply filed on 12/03/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 11-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/03/2025.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (CN116479525A), an English computer translation (CT) is provided, in view of Shen et al (US 2021/0140064) and Sakurada et al (JP 2002-326888), an English computer translation (CT2) is provided.
Li et al teaches a method for manufacturing a single-crystal silicon ingot in a single crystal growing furnace, wherein the single crystal growing furnace comprises a furnace body 1, a heat insulation cylinder, a heater 3, and a crucible 2, the heat insulation cylinder 6,7,8 is arranged in the furnace body, the heater 3 is arranged in the heat insulation cylinder, and the heater 3 is located on a periphery of the crucible 2, the heat insulation cylinder comprises an upper heat insulation cylinder 6, a middle heat insulation cylinder 7, a lower heat insulation cylinder 8, and a support ring 9, the support ring 9 is located between the upper heat insulation cylinder and the middle heat insulation cylinder, along a height direction of the single crystal growing furnace (CT [n0017]-[n0025], Fig 1), a distance between a top of the heater and a bottom of the support ring is an oxygen passing gap (CT [n0025] teaches a distance between a top of the heater 3 and the support ring 9 is 20-30 mm).
In regards to the method comprises: silicon melting, seeding, shoulder putting, shoulder turning, constant-diameter growth, tailing, and cooling, Li et al teaches a melt of liquid silicon, pulling the crystal from the head of a single crystal silicon rod (seed) and the crystal has a tail, pulling a constant diameter (CT [n0044]-[n0050]), which clearly suggests silicon melting, seeding, constant-diameter growth, tailing. However, Li et al does not explicitly teach shoulder putting, shoulder turning and cooling.
In a method of Czochralski crystal growth, Shen et al teaches the Czochralski (CZ) method is an important method for preparing single crystal silicon comprising high-purity silicon material placed in the crucible is heated by a thermal field composed of a carbon material to melt it, and then the seed is immersed in the melt and undergoes a series of (seeding, shouldering, body, tailing, cooling) processes to obtain a single crystal ingot ([0003]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Li et al by performing the conventionally known steps of Czochralski crystal growth of seeding, shouldering, body, tailing, cooling, as taught by Shen et al, to obtain a single crystal silicon ingot having a desired diameter from a silicon melt.
The combination of Li et al and Shen et al does not teach the heater is movable relative to the support ring to adjust the oxygen passing gap, wherein the oxygen passing gap is a first distance in the stage of seeding and is a second distance in the stage of constant-diameter growth, where the first distance is greater than the second distance.
In a Czochralski crystal growth method, Sakurada et al teaches single crystals by the CZ method, comprising a crucible 12 and a single crystal 3 are rotated in opposite directions while the crystal is grown; a crucible support shaft 19 is made capable of moving up and down and rotating freely by a crucible rotation and lifting mechanism 40 (CT2 [0020]-[0025], [0064]). Sakurada et al also teaches if the position of the crucible 12 is kept fixed, the liquid level will gradually decrease, and to counteract this, the crucible 12 is raised by the crucible lifting mechanism 40 and a heater 7 for the crucible 12 is raised in accordance with the crucible 12 by a lifting mechanism 6 (CT2 [0016], [0035]-[0040], [0064]). Sakurada et al teaches by raising the heater in accordance with the movement of the crucible, the heating center of the heater can be moved in accordance with the movement of the crucible and, consequently, the decrease in the amount of molten raw material, thus enabling more appropriate heating of the molten material (CT2 [0016]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the combination of Li et al and Shen et al by providing the heater is movable, as taught by Sakurada et al, to move the heating center of the heater in accordance with the movement of the crucible and, consequently, the decrease in the amount of molten raw material, thus enabling more appropriate heating of the molten material (CT2 [0016]).
In regards to the oxygen passing gap is a first distance in the stage of seeding and is a second distance in the stage of constant-diameter growth, where the first distance is greater than the second distance, the combination of Li et al, Shen et al and Sakurada et al teaches seed and pulling a crystal from a melt, and the heater moves upward in accordance with the decrease melt as the crystal grows; therefore, the oxygen passing gap would be expected to be greater during the seeding stage when the melt is at its highest level, and the oxygen passing gap would be expected to decrease during the growth of the constant-diameter portion because the melt level would have decreased, thus the heater will be raised to a higher position while the support ring is in a fixed position which would decrease the oxygen passing gap.
Referring to claims 2, the combination of Li et al, Shen et al and Sakurada et al does not explicitly teach in the stage of silicon melting, the oxygen passing gap is a third distance, and the third distance ranges from 20 mm to 30 mm, and in the stage of seeding, the first distance is adjusted to 35 mm to 42 mm. The examiner maintains the combination of Li et al, Shen et al and Sakurada et al teaches a movable heater, thus enabling more appropriate heating of the molten material (Sakurada CT2 [0016]) and the gap would change as the position of the heater is changed. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the combination of Li et al, Shen et al and Sakurada et al by having the claimed distances to optimizing the heating the molten material by conducting routine experimentation of a result effective variable (MPEP 2144.05). Furthermore, the size of the gap is a change in change is size and scale because different sized chambers, crucibles, heaters and crucible would require different positions and gap size; therefore, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing because changes in size and shape are prima facie obvious (MPEP 2144.04).
Referring to claims 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, see the remarks above regarding claim 2. Claims 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 merely further limit the claimed invention by reciting specific gap values and the combination of Li et al, Shen et al and Sakurada et al does not explicitly teach the claimed gap ranges. The examiner maintains the combination of Li et al, Shen et al and Sakurada et al teaches a movable heater, thus enabling more appropriate heating of the molten material (Sakurada CT2 [0016]) and the gap would change as the position of the heater is changed. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the combination of Li et al, Shen et al and Sakurada et al by having the claimed distances to optimizing the heating the molten material by conducting routine experimentation of a result effective variable (MPEP 2144.05). Furthermore, the size of the gap is a change in change is size and scale because different sized chambers, crucibles, heaters and crucible would require different positions and gap size; therefore, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing because changes in size and shape are prima facie obvious (MPEP 2144.04).
Referring to claim 5, the combination of Li et al, Shen et al and Sakurada et al teaches a movable heater that changes with the movement of the crucible and melt level, which would clearly suggest the gap adjustment occurs concurrently with the stage of the constant-diameter growth because the melt is constantly decreasing.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yamagishi et al (US 5,785,758) teaches a Czochralski crystal growth method wherein the main heater 7 is lowered by the desired distance based on calculations interlocked with the weight of the single crystal (col 3, ln 1-67, col 4, ln 1-67).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW J SONG whose telephone number is (571)272-1468. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM-6PM.
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, Kaj Olsen can be reached at 571-272-1344. 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.
MATTHEW J. SONG
Examiner
Art Unit 1714
/MATTHEW J SONG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1714