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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on February 1, 2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) and 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because:
Reference character “15” has been used to designate both the conductive brush (Fig. 2) and presumably an upper auxiliary electrode bath in Fig. 4;
Reference characters 15 and 16 in Fig. 4 appears to be mislabeled; the specification in paragraph 40 describes upper auxiliary electrode bath 16 and lower auxiliary electrode bath 17, however, the description of Fig. 4 does not match the drawing and feature 17 is not present in Fig. 4.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). 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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “an upper copper etching mechanism” in claims 6 and 7; “cathode connection mechanisms” in claim 8; and “a thickening segment” in claim 9.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 4-7, and 9 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 4 and 5, the claims require the presence of pressing wheels that are mounted spatially different from respective belt rolls and appears to refer to the embodiment in Fig. 3 of the applicant’s drawing. However, claim 1 requires that the first belt roll comes in contact with the third belt roll, and the second belt roll comes in contact with the fourth belt roll which appears to refer to the embodiment of Fig. 1. The requirement of claims 4 and 5 appear to contradict the requirement of claim 1. Clarification is required.
Regarding claims 6, 7, and 9, claim limitations “an upper copper etching mechanism” in claims 6 and 7, “cathode connection mechanisms” in claim 8, and “a thickening segment” in claim 9 invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Regarding the phrase “upper copper etching mechanism,” the specification does not describe what is the corresponding structure for this mechanism. It’s not clear whether it is simply just a liquid etchant or some other structure for etching copper. Regarding the phrase “thickening segment,” the specification does not describe the corresponding structure for a thickening segment, and it is not clear what a thickening segment is since this is not a standard terminology.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 5, and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen (CN 114164478, cited in IDS filed February 1, 2024).
Regarding claim 1, Chen a cathode conduction mechanism, comprising:
a first conductive belt 501 (Fig. 3) and a first conductive belt assembly (upper belt mechanism shown in Fig. 3), wherein the first conductive belt assembly comprises a first belt roll (lower row left conductive belt pulley 503; see annotated figure below) and a second belt roll (lower row right conductive belt pulley 503), and the first conductive belt 501 (Fig. 3) covers the first belt roll and the second belt roll; and
PNG
media_image1.png
1095
1572
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a second conductive belt 502 (Fig. 3) and a second conductive belt assembly (lower belt mechanism shown in Fig. 3), wherein the second conductive belt assembly comprises a third belt roll (upper row left conductive belt pulley 507; see annotated figure below) and a fourth belt roll (upper row right conductive belt pulley 507), and the second conductive belt covers the third belt roll and the fourth belt roll,
PNG
media_image2.png
1269
1506
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein the first belt roll comes in rolling contact with the third belt roll, and the second belt roll comes in rolling contact with the fourth belt roll (as shown in Fig. 3, the rolls are in contact with each other on the left and the right side).
Regarding claim 4, Chen teaches wherein the first conductive belt assembly further comprises a plurality of upper pressing wheels (pressure rollers 512; Fig. 3); and the plurality of upper pressing wheels are located between the first belt roll and the second belt roll (pressure rollers 512 are located between the left and right belt rolls 503), with a mounting height lower than a mounting height of each of the first belt roll and the second belt roll (i.e., the center axis of the pressure rollers 512 are below the center axis of the left and right belt rolls 503).
Regarding claim 5, Chen teaches wherein the second conductive belt assembly further comprises a plurality of lower pressing wheels (pressure rollers 514; Fig. 3); and the plurality of lower pressing wheels are located between the third belt roll and the fourth belt roll (pressure rollers 514 are located between the left and right belt rolls 507), with a mounting height higher than a mounting height of each of the third belt roll and the fourth belt roll (i.e., the center axis of the pressure rollers 514 are above the center axis of the left and right belt rolls 507).
Regarding claim 8, Chen teaches an electroplating system, comprising an electroplating bath (plating bath 2; Figs. 1-2) and cathode conduction mechanisms (cathode edge conductive mechanism 5 shown in Fig. 3), wherein the cathode conduction mechanisms are provided in a film coating segment of the electroplating bath in mirror symmetry and respectively located at two sides of a film feeding direction of a thin film (cathode edge conductive mechanism 5 is provided on both sides of the bath, Fig. 1); and a plurality of upper and lower electroplating anodes are provided in the electroplating bath and are provided between the cathode conduction mechanisms at two sides of the electroplating bath (i.e., positive electrode titanium baskets 3 and 4 on either side of the substrate film 17, paragraph 34 and Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 9, Chen teaches wherein a thickening segment (i.e., broadly interpreted to be the front section around inlet 14 in Fig. 2) the thickening segment is further provided at a front end of the film coating segment of the electroplating bath, and the thickening segment is configured to thicken a plated layer at an edge of the thin film (i.e., the front section with inlet 14 is structurally capable of providing a material that would be capable of thickening the plated layer).
Regarding claim 10, Chen teaches wherein a pre-plating bath is provided at a front end of the electroplating bath; and a conduction roll, a pass-over roll and an anode plate are provided in the pre-plating bath (i.e., Chen teaches two duplicate sections having the same structures as shown in Fig. 1; the duplicate device in the front would be broadly interpreted to be the pre-plating bath having the recited conduction roll and electrodes).
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Nakamura (US 6077411).
Chen teaches the cathode conduction mechanism as applied to claim 1 above. Chen does not explicitly teach upper or lower auxiliary electrode baths and an upper copper etching mechanism.
Nakamura teaches an electroplating apparatus using an endless belt 105 or 405 that is connected to the power supply (column 3, lines 13-18, and column 15, lines 38-41). Nakamura further teaches the substrate 403 (Fig. 4) is fed from the feed roller 410 and finally wound up by the wind-up roller 411 via the first washing tank 417 (i.e., upper auxiliary electrode bath), the first electrodeposition tank 418, the second washing tank 419 (i.e., a lower auxiliary electrode bath) in succession while being held in an intimate contact with the endless belt 405 conveyed by the conveyance rollers 420 and supported by the edge-supporting rollers 413 (column 6, lines 56-62). The washing liquid 414 and ultrasonic vibrating members 416 within the bath broadly reads on the upper copper etching mechanism. It is noted that the spatial relationship of “upper” and “lower” is relative and can be broadly read on a spatial relationship in the horizontal direction.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention have incorporated the upper and lower auxiliary electrode bath and upper copper etching mechanism of Nakamura because it would help to clean the substrate and belt to remove any residual electrolytes or solutions from the substrate and the belt.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record does not teach or suggest the claimed invention as a whole, in particular the limitation of the wherein the second conductive belt is wider than the first conductive belt, and a wider portion of the second conductive belt over the first conductive belt is provided with a conductive brush; or, the first conductive belt is wider than the second conductive belt, and a wider portion of the first conductive belt over the second conductive belt is provided with a conductive brush. None of the prior art references teach or suggest the limitations of claim 2.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUAN V VAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8521. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5:00.
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, Patricia Mallari can be reached at (571) 272-4729. 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.
/LUAN V VAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1795
Prosecution Insights