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 .
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 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.
Claims 1 - 2, 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. (US Publication No.: US 2020/0094375 A1) in view of Kakita et al. (US Publication No.: US 2022/0068304 A1) and further view of Kou et al. (WIPO Publication No.: WO0191975 A1).
In reference to claim 1, Tsai et al. discloses a method for conditioning a polishing tool (13, Tsai et al. Paragraph 60), comprising: a substrate rotation process ("platen rotates pad", Paragraph 60), holding a silicon substrate (“configured to polish a substrate (e.g. silicon wafer), Tsai et al. Paragraph 60) having a main surface (“surface of substrate”, Tsai et al. Paragraph 60) in a horizontal posture (see annotated Tsai et al. Fig 1B) and rotating the substrate (118, Tsai et al. Fig 1B) about a vertical axis (see annotated Tsai et al. Fig 1B);
PNG
media_image1.png
568
870
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and a conditioning execution process (Tsai et al. Paragraph 14), executing conditioning of the polishing tool by bringing the polishing tool into contact with the main surface (“surface of substrate”, Tsai et al. Paragraph 60) of the substrate that is being rotated.
Tsai does not expressly disclose that the substrate rotation process holds a dummy substrate in a non-mirror state and that the polishing tool has a resin body in which abrasive grains are dispersed.
Kakita et al. discloses a dummy substrate (10, Paragraph 26) in a non-mirror state (“surface roughness”, Kakita et al. Paragraph 65).
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 method of Tsai et al. with the use of dummy substrates as taught by Kakita et al. in order to calibrate and stabilize the internal environment of the process chambers.
Kou et al further discloses a polishing tool has a resin body (Kou et al. lines 121-123) in which abrasive grains (Kou et al. lines 121-123) are dispersed.
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 tool of Tsai et al. with the polishing tool of Kou et al. in order to efficiently polish wafers.
In reference to claim 2, Tsai et al. discloses the method for conditioning the polishing tool (13, Tsai et al. Paragraph 60), but does not disclose wherein the main surface of the dummy substrate in the non-mirror state is formed by processing the main surface of the dummy substrate by using a chemical solution.
Kakita et al. teaches wherein the main surface (11a, Kakita et al. Fig 1, Paragraph 30) of the dummy substrate (10, Kakita et al. Fig 1) in the non-mirror state (“surface roughness”, Kakita et al. Paragraph 65) is formed by processing the main surface of the dummy substrate by using a chemical solution (“rinsing solution”, Kakita et al. Paragraph 52).
PNG
media_image2.png
490
566
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 method of Tsai et al. with the use of dummy substrates as taught by Kakita et al. in order to calibrate and stabilize the internal environment of the process chambers.
In reference to claim 4, Tsai et al. discloses the method for conditioning the polishing tool (13, Tsai et al. Paragraph 60), wherein in the conditioning execution process (Tsai et al. Paragraph 14), the conditioning of the polishing tool (13, Tsai et al. Paragraph 60) is executed by moving the polishing tool between a center (“second position”, Paragraph 70) of the substrate and an edge (“first position”, Tsai et al. Paragraph 74) of the substrate (118, Tsai et al. Fig 1B) while bringing the polishing tool into contact with the main surface (“surface of substrate”, Tsai et al. Paragraph 60) of the substrate that is being rotated.
Tsai et al. does not expressly disclose that the substrate rotation process holds a dummy substrate.
Kakita et al. discloses a dummy substrate (10, Paragraph 26)
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 method of Tsai et al. with the use of dummy substrates as taught by Kakita et al. in order to calibrate and stabilize the internal environment of the process chambers.
Claim 3 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. (US Publication No.: US 2020/0094375 A1) in view of Kakita et al. (US Publication No.: US 2022/0068304 A1), in further view of Kou et al. (WIPO Publication No.: WO0191975 A1), and in further view of Kozasa (US Publication No.: US 2009/0298393).
In reference to claim 3, Tsai et al. discloses the method for conditioning the polishing tool (13, Tsai et al. Paragraph 60), and mentions that the polishing fluid may comprise an abrasive-containing polishing slurry (Tsai et al. Paragraph 60) but does not disclose that the chemical solution is ammonia water.
Kozasa teaches the use of ammonia water during a method of polishing substrates (“ammonia water”, Kozasa Paragraph 28). 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 method of Tsai et al. with the use of ammonia water for its polishing fluid as taught by Kozasa in order to remove chemical impurities and particles of substrates.
Claims 5- 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. (US Publication No.: US 2020/0094375 A1) in view of Kakita et al. (US Publication No.: US 2022/0068304 A1) and in further view of Kou et al. (WIPO Publication No.: WO0191975 A1)
In reference to claim 5, Tsai et al. discloses a substrate processing method, comprising: a substrate rotation process ("platen rotates pad", Paragraph 60), holding a silicon substrate (“configured to polish a substrate (e.g. silicon wafer), Tsai et al. Paragraph 60) having a main surface (“surface of substrate”, Tsai et al. Paragraph 60) in a horizontal posture (see Tsai et al. Fig 1B) and rotating the substrate about a vertical axis (see annotated Tsai et al. Fig 1B); a conditioning execution process (Tsai et al. Paragraph 14), executing conditioning of the polishing tool (13, Tsai et al. Paragraph 60) by bringing the polishing tool into contact with the main surface of the substrate (“surface of substrate”, Tsai et al. Paragraph 60) that is being rotated and a polishing process (“polishing process”, Tsai et al. Paragraph 60), polishing a back surface of a production substrate (118, Tsai et al. Fig 1B) by using the polishing tool on which the conditioning is performed. The examiner notes that the applicant does not clearly specify the back side of the production substrate and interprets that the surface in contact with the production wafer is the back surface.
Tsai does not expressly disclose that the substrate rotation process holds a dummy substrate in a non-mirror state and that the polishing tool has a resin body in which abrasive grains are dispersed.
Kakita et al. discloses a dummy substrate being held in a non-mirror state (“surface roughness”, Kakita et al. Paragraph 65).
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 method of Tsai et al. with the use of dummy substrates as taught by Kakita et al. in order to calibrate and stabilize the internal environment of the process chambers.
Kou et al discloses a polishing tool has a resin body (Kou et al. lines 121-123) in which abrasive grains (Kou et al. lines 121-123) are dispersed.
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 tool of Tsai et al. with the polishing tool of Kou et al. in order to efficiently polish wafers.
In reference to claim 6, Tsai et al. discloses a substrate processing device (1000, Tsai et al. Fig 24), comprising a holding (“retaining ring”, Tsai et al. Paragraph 60) and rotating part (14, Tsai et al. Paragraph 60), holding a substrate (118, Tsai et al. Fig 1B) having a main surface (“surface of substrate”, Tsai et al. Paragraph 60) in a horizontal posture (see annotated Tsai et al. Fig 1B) and rotating the substrate about a vertical axis (see annotated Tsai et al. Fig 1B); a polishing tool movement mechanism (120, Tsai et al. Paragraph 76), moving the polishing tool (106, Tsai et al. Paragraph 76); and a control part (152, Tsai et al. Paragraph 81, Fig 24), controlling substrate processing (Tsai et al. Paragraph 81), wherein the control part executes conditioning of the polishing part (104, Tsai et al. Fig 24) by bringing the polishing tool (106, Tsai et al. Paragraph 76) into contact with the main surface of the substrate (see annotated Tsai et al Fig 24) being rotated (see annotated Tsai et al Fig 24) by the holding (“retaining ring”, Tsai et al. Paragraph 60) and rotating part (114, Tsai et al. Fig 24) by using the polishing tool movement mechanism (120, Tsai et al. Paragraph 76).
Tsai et al. does not expressly disclose that the substrate rotation process holds a dummy substrate in a non-mirror state and that the polishing tool has a resin body in which abrasive grains are dispersed.
Kakita et al. discloses a dummy substrate being held in a non-mirror state (“surface roughness”, Kakita et al. Paragraph 65).
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 method of Tsai et al. with the use of dummy substrates as taught by Kakita et al. in order to calibrate and stabilize the internal environment of the process chambers.
Kou et al discloses a polishing tool has a resin body (Kou et al. lines 121-123) in which abrasive grains (Kou et al. lines 121-123) are dispersed.
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 tool of Tsai et al. with the polishing tool of Kou et al. in order to efficiently polish wafers.
In reference to claim 7, Tsai et al. as modified by Kakita et al. discloses the substrate processing device (1000, Tsai et al. Fig 24) as disclosed in claim 6 but does not disclose that the non-mirror state is a state rougher than a mirror surface.
PNG
media_image3.png
732
1056
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Kakita et al. teaches a substrate whose front and rear main surface have a roughness in the range between 0.2nm and 100nm. While Kakita et al. does not expressly state that the non-mirror state is a state rougher than a mirror surface, 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 roughness of the substrate’s surfaces as a matter of routine optimization since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP 2144.05, Section II, Part A).
In reference to claim 8, Tsai et al. as modified by Kakita et al. discloses the substrate processing device (1000, Tsai et al. Fig 24) as disclosed in claim 6 but does not disclose that the non-mirror state is a state rougher than a back surface of the dummy substrate.
Kakita et al. teaches a substrate whose front and rear main surface have a roughness in the range between 0.2nm and 100nm. While Kakita et al. does not expressly state that the non-mirror state is a state rougher than a back surface of the dummy substrate., 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 roughness of the substrate’s surfaces as a matter of routine optimization since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP 2144.05, Section II, Part A).
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. (US Publication No.: US 2020/0094375 A1) in view of Kakita et al. (US Publication No.: US 2022/0068304 A1), in further view of Kou et al. (WIPO Publication No.: WO0191975 A1), and in further view of Takao et al. (US Patent No.: US 1112241 B2).
In reference to claim 9, Tsai et al. as modified by Kakita et al. discloses the substrate processing device (1000, Tsai et al. Fig 24) that performs the conditioning of the polishing tool (104, Tsai et al. Fig 24) as disclosed in claim 6 but does not disclose of a dummy substrate storage part, storing the dummy substrate; and a transport robot, transporting the dummy substrate, wherein, at a time of performing the conditioning of the polishing tool, the control part transports the dummy substrate from the dummy substrate storage part to the holding and rotating part by using the transport robot, and after performing the conditioning of the polishing tool, the control part transports the dummy substrate from the holding and rotating part to the dummy substrate storage part by using the transport robot.
Takao et al. teaches a dummy substrate storage part (20, Takao et al. Column 4, line 10), storing the dummy substrate (Takao et al. Column 4, lines 12-13); and a transport robot (41, Takao et al. Column 4 lines 32-36), transporting the dummy substrate (“dummy wafer”, Takao et al. Column 4 lines 32-36), the control part (100, Takao et al. Column 5, lines 50 -51) transports the dummy substrate from the dummy substrate storage part (Takao et al. Column 8, lines 16-21) to the holding (70, Takao et al. Column 9, lines 5-9) and rotating part (“rotary table”, Takao et al. Column 9, lines 5-9) by using the transport robot, and also the control part transports the dummy substrate from the holding and rotating part to the dummy substrate storage part by using the transport robot (61, Takao et al. Column 5, lines 11-15).
While Takao et al. does not expressly disclose that the control part transports the dummy substrate during and after the conditioning of the polishing tool, Takao et al. does disclose that its substrate processing apparatus is capable of communicating with an external control apparatus (Takao et al. Column 1, lines 44-45 and see Fig 4). The examiner interprets this capability as the substrate processing apparatus of Takao et al. could communicate with the controller of Tsai et al.
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 substrate processing device of Tsai et al. and integrate the substrate processing apparatus as taught by Takao et al. in order to store, transport and process dummy substrates during the conditioning of a polishing tool.
In reference to claim 10, Tsai et al. as modified by Kakita et al. discloses the substrate processing device (1000, Tsai et al. Fig 24) that performs the conditioning of the polishing tool (104, Tsai et al. Fig 24) as disclosed in claim 6 but does not disclose of a carrier, storing a production substrate, wherein, after performing the conditioning of the polishing tool, the control part transports the production substrate from the carrier to the holding and rotating part by using the transport robot, and polishes, by using the polishing tool, a back surface of the production substrate held by the holding and rotating part.
Takao et al. teaches a carrier (11, Takao et al. Column 3, lines 61-65), storing a production substrate (“product wafers”, Takao et al. Column 3, lines 64-65), the control part (100, Takao et al. Column 5, lines 50 -51) transports the production substrate from the carrier to the holding (70, Takao et al. Column 9, lines 5-9) and rotating part (“rotary table”, Takao et al. Column 9, lines 5-9) by using the transport robot (41, Takao et al. Column 4 lines 32-36), and polishes, by using the polishing tool, a back surface of the production substrate held by the holding and rotating part. The examiner notes that the applicant does not clearly specify the back side of the production substrate and interprets that the surface in contact with the production wafer is the back surface.
While Takao et al. does not expressly disclose that the control part transports the dummy substrate after the conditioning of the polishing tool, Takao et al. does disclose that its substrate processing apparatus is capable of communicating with an external control apparatus (Takao et al. Column 1, lines 44-45 and see Fig 4). The examiner interprets this capability as the substrate processing apparatus of Takao et al. could communicate with the controller of Tsai et al.
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 substrate processing device of Tsai et al. and integrate the substrate processing apparatus as taught by Takao et al. in order to store, transport and process dummy and production substrates during the conditioning of a polishing tool.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRISHA JOY UTULO FRANCISCO whose telephone number is (571) 272-1224. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5.
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.
/T.U.F./Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/KATINA N. HENSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights