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 1-7 and Species A2 in the reply filed on March 2, 2026, is acknowledged.
Claims 2 and 8-10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention and species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on March 2, 2026.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Drawings
Figure 3 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(B) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites “a calculated heater power of the one of the crystal lengths” in l. 2. Since there is a previous recitation of “a calculated heater power” in claim 1 it is unclear whether applicants intended to refer to the same or a different calculated heater power. For examination purposes it is assumed applicants intended to recite “the calculated heater power of the one of the crystal lengths.”
Claim 4 recites “a sectional target curve of heater power” in l. 2. Since there is a previous recitation of “a sectional target curve” in claim 1 it is unclear whether applicants intended to refer to the same or a different sectional target curve. For examination purposes it is assumed applicants intended to recite “the sectional target curve of heater power.”
Claim 5 recites “a target controlling curve” in l. 2. Since there is a previous recitation of “a target controlling curve” in claim 1 it is unclear whether applicants intended to refer to the same or a different target controlling curve. For examination purposes it is assumed applicants intended to recite “the target controlling curve.”
Claim 6 recites “a calculated heater power at the one of the crystal lengths” in l. 2. Since there is a previous recitation of “a calculated heater power” in claim 1 it is unclear whether applicants intended to refer to the same or a different calculated heater power. For examination purposes it is assumed applicants intended to recite “the calculated heater power at the one of the crystal lengths.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1 and 3-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Claims 1 and 3-7 broadly recite(s) a method of controlling crystal growth comprising the steps of (1) obtaining a sectional target curve, (2) obtaining a calculated heater power, and (3) obtaining a target controlling curve.
Sep 2A, Prong 1:
The limitations relating to (1) obtaining a sectional target curve, (2) obtaining a calculated heater power, and (3) obtaining a target controlling curve appear to involve nothing more than the abstract steps of obtaining data showing heater power versus crystal length, interpolating data between adjacent data points to obtain a calculated heater power, and then obtaining a target controlling curve. Thus, steps (1)-(3) do not appear to be directed to anything more than obtaining data and performing a mathematical step and/or an evaluation of the results, all of which are abstract ideas and, consequently, are directed to a judicial exception. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(I)(C).
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In this case once the abstract idea is completed by performing steps (1)-(3) nothing else is performed. As an example, there is no actual application of the steps to control the heater power during crystal growth. Consequently, there is no actual link between the abstract idea and a practical application. See MPEP 2106.04(d).
Step 2B:
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed supra, there is no actual application of steps (1)-(3) to a method of crystal growth. Thus, there are no significant additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application in order to transform the nature of the claim into a patent-eligible application of the judicial exception. See MPEP 2106.05.
Dependent claims 3-7 do not appear to recite any additional elements which transform the abstract idea of claim 1 into a practical application and, hence, are similarly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to unpatentable subject matter due to their dependence on claim 1. As an example, claim 3 merely recites applying a mathematical equation by performing the interpolation calculation using a B-spline curve and claims 4-5 merely provide additional details regarding how a sectional target curve and is obtained a target controlling curve are obtained. Claim 6 merely recites how the heater power is compensated based on deviations in the crystal diameter while claim 7 merely recites the number of sections that are used to interpolate the data.
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.
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(s) 1 and 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Appl. Publ. No. 2016/0333496 to Yanagimachi, et al. (hereinafter “Yanagimachi”).
Regarding claim 1, Yanagimachi teaches a method of controlling crystal growth (see the Abstract, Figs. 1-13, and entire reference which teach a method of controlling crystal growth during the Czochralski process), comprising steps of:
obtaining a sectional target curve of heater power at different crystal lengths, the sectional target curve comprising at least one joint point which is an intersection point of two adjacent sections of the sectional target curve (see Figs. 1-9 and ¶¶[0042]-[0067] which teach a method for crystal growth by the Czochralski process with Fig. 6 and the Example in ¶¶[0063]-[0067] specifically teaching obtaining a curve of heater power at different crystal lengths which necessarily includes a plurality of joint points between adjacent sections);
based on one of the crystal lengths, obtaining a calculated heater power at the one of the crystal lengths by interpolation calculation, to be used as a controlling value of heater power at the one of the crystal lengths (see Figs. 3-8 and ¶¶[0055]-[0067] which teach that a heater power that is used at a given crystal length is corrected by the removed heat quantity and is used as the controlling value of the heater power at that crystal length); and
based on the controlling value of heater power at the crystal lengths, obtaining a target controlling curve, which is smooth at the joint point (see Figs. 7-8 and the Example in ¶¶[0063]-[0067] which teach that a target controlling curve which is smooth at one or more joint points is obtained).
Regarding claim 5, Yanagimachi teaches that the step of obtaining a target controlling curve which is smooth at the joint point comprises obtaining the target controlling curve a first derivative of which is continuous before and after the joint point, and a slope of which is the first derivative (see Figs. 6-8 and the Example in ¶¶[0063]-[0067] which teach that the power pattern is corrected by the removed heat quantity to produce a smoother curve with a slope (i.e., a first derivative) which is substantially continuous (i.e., not disjointed) for at least certain points along the body length).
Regarding claim 6, Yanagimachi teaches that after the step of obtaining a calculated heater power at the one of the crystal lengths to be used as a controlling value of heater power at the one of the crystal lengths, further comprising a step of based on a deviation of crystal diameter, compensating a deviation of heater power (see Figs. 3 & 6-9 and ¶¶[0048]-[0054] which teach that the crystal diameter is measured and a correction value for the heater power on the basis of the measured value of the crystal diameter is obtained; moreover, this step is performed after obtaining a calculate heater power to be used as a controlling value).
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 4 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yanagimachi.
Regarding claim 4, Yanagimachi does not explicitly teach that the step of obtaining a sectional target curve of heater power at different crystal lengths comprises continuously analyzing historical data of crystal growth, and repeating iteration until obtaining the sectional target curve of heater power at different crystal lengths. However, absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been within the capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to obtain average heater power values from a plurality of successive crystal growth runs instead of a single growth run in order to average out any fluctuations and thereby obtain an average heater power value as a function of body length that more accurately represents the heater power required as a function of body length.
Regarding claim 7, Yanagimachi does not explicitly teach that a section number of sectional target curve of heater power is within 30 to 100 sections. However, in Fig. 6 and the Example in ¶¶[0063]-[0067] Yanagimachi teaches that there are a plurality of sections where the actual heater power (kW) fluctuates above and below a mean value which is smoothed out to produce an actual removed heat quantity. Although Yanagimachi is silent regarding the exact number of sections that are used to produce an average temperature curve, it would have been within the capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize routine experimentation to determine the optimal number of heater power measurement points or section numbers, including within the claimed range of 30 to 100 sections necessary to produce a corrected power pattern with the desired accuracy and level of continuity.
Claim 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yanagimachi in view of Chinese Patent Appl. Publ. No. CN 106076117 A to Luo, et al. (“Luo”).
Regarding claim 3, Yanagimachi does not teach that the step of obtaining a calculated heater power at the one of the crystal lengths by interpolation calculation comprises performing interpolation calculation of B-spline curve to obtain the calculated heater power at the one of the crystal lengths. However, in the Abstract, Figs. 1-3, and the Invention contents at pp. 3-6 as well as elsewhere throughout the entire reference Luo teaches an embodiment of a thermal power generation and load comprising, inter alia, a high pressure cylinder, a high pressure heater, and a conveying pipe. The disclosed control method includes the steps of (S1) collecting the actual pressure of the high-pressure heater and a pressure difference value and (S2) using B spline fitting to interpolate discrete data using a spline interpolation algorithm. The teachings of Luo show that missing data between discrete data points may be interpolated using B-spline fitting in order to obtain a continuous curve. Moreover, the teachings of Luo are relevant to the problem to be solved, which is that of correcting or smoothing out discrete data points in order to obtain a continuous and representative curve. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention would look to the teachings of Luo and would be motivated to utilize a B-spline fitting curve to interpolate adjacent data points in, for example, Fig. 6 of Yanagimachi and thereby obtain a smoother and continuous curve that is representative of the actual heater power required for a given crystal length.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH A BRATLAND JR whose telephone number is (571)270-1604. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday, 7:30 am to 4:30 pm 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, 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.
/KENNETH A BRATLAND JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1714