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 .
Claim Interpretation
Means plus function 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:
The term height correcting member is recited in claims 1-20 where “height correcting” is the functional language and “member” is the generic placeholder. Likewise, the terms first height correcting member and second height correcting member are recited in claims 2 and 10.
The term first fixing member is recited in claims 5-8 and 13-16 where “fixing” (as in fixing the height correcting member to the external portion of the frame) is the functional language and “member” is the generic placeholder.
The term second fixing member is recited in claims 6-8 and 14-16 where “fixing” as in fixing the height correcting member to the mask fixing portion is the functional language and “member” is the generic placeholder.
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.
See Fig. 4 where the height correcting member 250 is a structure that removes a gap between the ends of the long-side/short-side sticks of the mask fixing portion 210 and may be provided in plural and multiple height correcting members see [0065] of the originally filed specification. In [0076] of the originally filed specification recites that the height correcting member comprises first height correcting member 2501, second height correcting member 2502, third height correcting member 2503, and fourth height correcting member 2504 see also Fig. 3.
See Figs. 8 and 9 and the original specification [0101] and [0109] where the fixing member 251 is recited and interpreted as the “first fixing member” as the first fixing member fixes the external portion of the frame to the height correcting member which corresponds to claims 5 and 13.
See Figs. 8 and 10, where the fixing member 211 is interpreted as the “second fixing member” is illustrated, see also [0102] of the originally filed specification where the second fixing member fix the long/short-side sticks of the mask fixing portion to the height correcting member, which corresponds to claims 5 and 14. Note [0110] of the originally filed specification where fixing member 212 is recited and can be interpreted as the “second fixing member where the second fixing member fixes the long/short-side sticks of the mask fixing portion to the external portion of the frame, which corresponds to claims 6 and 15.
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 Interpretation
Clarifying interpretation of the claimed range
Claim 19 recites that the angle of incline of the deposition unit with respect to gravity is about 4 degrees to about 14 degrees. Upon review of [0115] of the original specification where the disadvantages of the angle of incline being less than 4 degrees and greater than 14 degrees are recited. No patentable weight is being given to the word “about” thus the claimed angle of incline is interpreted as 4-14 degrees.
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.
Claims 1-4, 9-12, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park Jong Sung et al et al (KR2018003893 also known as KR 10-2018-0038093 cited in the IDS dated September 15, 2023 using a Machine Generated English Translation provided herewith in view of Yonghwan Kim (EP 3617341 A2).
Regarding claim 1. The prior art of Park Jong Sung et al et al teaches a mask assembly with a mask frame 310 which is coupled to mask 400. Park Jong Sung et al teaches a mask frame 310 has a rectangular shape with a pair of long sides (with grooves 332) and a pair of short sides (with grooves 331). The mask fixing portion of Park Jong Sung et al features a long side stick 130 and a short side stick 230. See Fig. 9 of Park Jon Sung et al below.
PNG
media_image1.png
700
680
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 9 of Park Jong Sung et al et al ( KR 10-2018-0038093)
The prior art of Park Jong Sung et al fails to teach that the mask assembly has a height correcting member connecting the mask fixing portion and the external portion of the frame.
The prior art of Yonghwan Kim teaches a mask assembly that includes a mask frame 43 and mask fixing portion long side stick 42a) where protrusions 42b (height correcting member) are provided to connect the mask fixing portion and the external portion of the frame see Fig. 2 and [0046], [0047] of Yonghwan Kim. The motivation to modify the apparatus of Park Jong Sung et al with the height correcting member suggested by Yong Whan Kim is that the height correcting member blocks the deposition materials from desired portions of the substrate. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the apparatus of Park Jong Sung et al with the height correcting member suggested by Yong Whan Kim.
PNG
media_image2.png
714
554
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2 of Yonghwan Kim (EP 3617341 A2)
Regarding claim 2. Recall the rejection of claim 1 above. The combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim fail to specifically teach that the height correcting member includes a first height correcting member and a second height correcting member, and the first height correcting member and the second height correcting member have different heights.
The prior art of Yonghwan Kim teaches that the height correcting member 42b can have any shape see [0047] of Yonghwan Kim. Note that the shape and dimensions of the height correcting member of Yonghwan Kim is a matter of design choice and would be determined and optimized without undue experimentation to ensure the gap between the mask and mask fixing portion is sufficient to mask the deposition material from the necessary portions of the substrate. The motivation to design the height correcting members of Yonghwan Kim such that the height correcting member includes a first height correcting member and a second height correcting member, and the first height correcting member and the second height correcting member have different heights is that gap between the mask and mask fixing portion may not be uniform along the external portions of the frame. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the apparatus of Park Jong Sung et al with the height correcting member suggested by Yonghwan Kim to be designed to have the optimal shapes and dimensions to include a design where the height correcting member includes a first height correcting member and a second height correcting member, and the first height correcting member and the second height correcting member have different heights.
Regarding claim 3. Recall the rejection of claim 1 above, where the prior art of Yonghwan Kim includes a height correcting member. The prior art of Yonghwan Kim further teaches in [0057] that the mask 43 can be made of an iron nickel alloy, that the stick 42 (masking fixing portion) is made of non-magnetic stainless steel, and that height correcting member may be made of a non-magnetic material. The material of construction of the height correcting material is a matter of design choice that would have been determined to possess the desired/optimal chemical and physical properties to withstand the deposition process environment. Furthermore, it is with a reasonable expectation of success that the same material (non-magnetic stainless steel which is a metal) used to construct the stick 42 is also chosen to construct the protrusion 42b (height correcting member). Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the apparatus of Park Jong Sung et al with the height correcting member suggested by Yonghwan Kim to construct the height correcting members of metal as a metal was already chosen to construct the mask fixing portion and mask.
Regarding claim 4. The mask assembly of Park Jong Sung et al illustrates that the frame 330 has a groove 331 on the external portion see Fig. 3, recall the prior art of Yonghwan Kim was used to teach the height correcting member. See [0046] Park Jong Sung et al where protrusions 42b is inserted into holes 42c is positioned in the groove. Upon combining the teachings of Park Jong Sung et al with the protrusions of Yonghwan Kim where the protrusions 42b would align with the grooves of 332/331 of Park Jong Sung et al to ensure that the protrusions are coupled with the frame and mask fixing portion. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the apparatus of Park Jong Sung et al with the height correcting member suggested by Yonghwan Kim to position the height correcting member in the groove to ensure that the protrusions are coupled with the frame and mask fixing portion.
Regarding claim 9. Recall the rejection of claim 1 wherein the combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim are used suggest a mask assembly with a mask, a frame, a masking fixing portion, and a height correcting member. Park Jong Sung et al also teaches that the mask assembly is provided in a deposition device where the deposition device also comprises: a deposition source providing a deposition material; and a deposition unit including a substrate receiving the deposition material. The prior art of Park Jong Sung et al illustrates Fig. 21 where the deposition device comprises a deposition source 700 and a substrate 600 to receive the deposition material.
PNG
media_image3.png
428
528
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. 21 of Park Jong Sung et al et al ( KR 10-2018-0038093)
Regarding claim 10. See the rejection of claim 9 and the rejection of claim 2 above.
Regarding claim 11. See the rejection of claim 9 and the rejection of claim 3 above.
Regarding claim 12. The mask assembly of Park Jong Sung et al illustrates that the frame 330 has a groove 331 on the external portion see Fig. 3, recall the prior art of Yonghwan Kim was used to teach the height correcting member. See [0046] Park Jong Sung et al where protrusions 42b is inserted into holes 42c is positioned in the groove. Upon combining the teachings of Park Jong Sung et al with the protrusions of Yonghwan Kim where the protrusions 42b would align with the grooves of 332/331 of Park Jong Sung et al to ensure that the protrusions are coupled with the frame and mask fixing portion. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the apparatus of Park Jong Sung et al with the height correcting member suggested by Yonghwan Kim to position the height correcting member in the groove. to ensure that the protrusions are coupled with the frame and mask fixing portion.
Regarding claim 18. See the rejection of claim 9 above and see Fig. 21 of Park Jong Sung et al above where the deposition device is arranged vertically with respect to gravity.
Claims 5-8 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park Jong Sung et al et al (KR2018003893 also known as KR 10-2018-0038093 cited in the IDS dated September 15, 2023 using a Machine Generated English Translation provided herewith in view of Yonghwan Kim (EP 3617341 A2) as applied to claims 1-4, 9-12, and 18 above, and in further view of Kang (US 2012/0325143).
The combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim were discussed above.
The apparatus resulting from the combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim fails to teach:
Regarding claim 5. The mask assembly of claim 4, wherein the height correcting member is fixed to the external portion of the frame by a first fixing member.
Regarding claim 6. The mask assembly of claim 5, wherein the height correcting member and the mask fixing portion are fixed by a second fixing member.
Regarding claim 13. The deposition device of claim 12, wherein the height correcting member is fixed to the external portion of the frame by a first fixing member.
Regarding claim 14. The deposition device of claim 13, wherein the height correcting member is fixed to the mask fixing portion by a second fixing member.
See the prior art of Kang where the mask frame assembly comprises fixing members 160 (coupling units which may be fasteners such as bolts or screws) according to [0068] of Kang to couple the mask fixing portion to the external portion of the frame where holes 171 are provided through the frame 110, holes 133 through the supporting units 131, and holes 141 through fixing unit 140. When the teaching of ensuring holes and fixing members are provided to couple the frame to masking fixing portion as suggested by Kang is incorporated into the mask assembly where there are height correcting members to connect the mask fixing portion and the external portion of the frame resulting from the combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim there is enhanced mating of the masking fixing portion, mask frame, and height correcting members. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to couple the frame to masking fixing portion as suggested by Kang is incorporated into the mask assembly where there are height correcting members to connect the mask fixing portion and the external portion of the frame resulting from the combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim.
Regarding claim 7. See the rejection of claim 6 above. See [0045] of Yonghwan Kim where the long side stick 42a of the mask fixing portion is coupled to the mask frame 41 via such fixing members as screws or bolts. These fixing members are interpreted as second fixing member.
Regarding claim 15. See the rejection of claim 14 above. See [0045] of Yonghwan Kim where the long side stick 42a of the mask fixing portion is coupled to the mask frame 41 via such fixing members as screws or bolts. These fixing members are interpreted as second fixing member.
Regarding claims 8 and 16:
The apparatus resulting from the combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim fails to teach:
Regarding claim 8. The mask assembly of claim 7, wherein the mask fixing portion is bent adjacent to the height correcting member.
Regarding claim 16. The deposition device of claim 15, wherein the mask fixing portion is bent adjacent to the height correcting member.
See Fig. 2 below and [0064], [0065], [0067] – [0069], [0072], [0074], [0078], [0079], [0081], [0082], [0085]of Kang where bending units 132 are discussed. According to Kang the motivation to further modify the apparatus resulting from the combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim with the bending unit to facilitate the space between the fixing unit to the frame to enhance coupling of the frame to the fixing unit. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention further modify the apparatus resulting from the combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim with the bending unit as suggested by Kang.
PNG
media_image4.png
658
473
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fig.2 of Kang (US 2012/0325143)
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park Jong Sung et al et al (KR2018003893 also known as KR 10-2018-0038093 cited in the IDS dated September 15, 2023 using a Machine Generated English Translation provided herewith in view of Yonghwan Kim (EP 3617341 A2) as applied to claims 1-4, 9-12, and 18 above, and in further view of further view of Kinuta Seichin et al (WO 2008/047458 using the Machine Generated English Translation provided herewith).
The combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim were discussed above.
The apparatus resulting from the combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim fails to teach the deposition unit further includes a fixing plate for fixing the substrate, and further fails to teach the mask is positioned on a side of the substrate, and another side of the substrate is fixed to the fixing plate.
The prior art of Kinuta Seichin teaches a wafer alignment apparatus using metal mask. The apparatus of Kinuta Seichin teaches the apparatus includes a wafer 1 with a wafer holder 2 using a wafer receiving plate 14 see the abstract and Figs. 1 and 2. The motivation to modify the apparatus resulting from the combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim by introducing a wafer receiving plate as suggested by Kinuta Seichin to support the wafer in order to enhance support of the wafer in the harsh physical and chemical environment of processing the wafer with the deposition unit resulting from the combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to further modify the apparatus resulting from the combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim where the deposition unit further includes a fixing plate for fixing the substrate, and further fails to teach the mask is positioned on a side of the substrate, and another side of the substrate is fixed to the fixing plate as suggested by Kinuta Seichin.
PNG
media_image5.png
692
646
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 of of Kinuta Seichin (WO 2008/047458)
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park Jong Sung et al et al (KR2018003893 also known as KR 10-2018-0038093 cited in the IDS dated September 15, 2023 using a Machine Generated English Translation provided herewith in view of Yonghwan Kim (EP 3617341 A2) as applied to claims 1-4, 9-12, and 18 above, and in further view of Mizumura Michinobu et al (WO 2013108823 using the Machine Generated English Translated herewith).
The combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim were discussed above.
The apparatus resulting from the combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim fails to teach the deposition unit is inclined with respect to gravity with an angle in a range of about 4 degrees to about 14 degrees. Recall that no patentable weight is being given to the word “about” thus the claimed angle of incline is interpreted as 4-14 degrees.
The prior art of Mizumura Michinobu et al teaches a masked film formation device with a mask (M) that inclines in a manner (angle inclined with respect to gravity) that matches the inclination of the substrate (S) using a control unit 24. The apparatus of Mizumura Michinobu et al also provides substrate tilt detective unit 22. In the abstract the prior art of Mizumura Michinobu et al it is taught the substrate and the mask are tilted to avoid collision at the point where the substrate and the mask are overlapped. The prior art of Mizumura Michinobu et al fails to specify the actual angle of incline or the range of angle of incline. Barring a showing of criticality, the angle of inclination is matter of optimization subsequently the actual or range angle of incline would have been determined without undue routine experimentation and would be optimized to ensure the angle of incline of the deposition unit matches the angle of incline of the substrate. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the apparatus resulting from the combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim by ensuring the angle of incline of the deposition unit respect to gravity is optimized to ensure an angle of incline is within the range of 4-18 degrees.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park Jong Sung et al et al (KR2018003893 also known as KR 10-2018-0038093 cited in the IDS dated September 15, 2023 using a Machine Generated English Translation provided herewith in view of Yonghwan Kim (EP 3617341 A2) as applied to claims 1-4, 9-12, and 18 above, and in further view of JP652880B1using a Machine Generated English Translation provided herewith.
The combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim were discussed above.
See the rejection of claim 18 above. The apparatus resulting from the combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim fails to teach that the deposition source includes: a vaporizer vaporizing the deposition material; a pipe connected to the vaporizer; and a nozzle extending vertically with respect to gravity.
See Fig. 3 of JP652880B1 where an evaporation source (deposition source) and evaporation apparatus 300X (deposition device) is illustrated. The deposition source includes a vaporizer (case 310X), a pipe (communication hole 311), and nozzles 350.
PNG
media_image6.png
283
406
media_image6.png
Greyscale
See Fig. 3 of JP652880B1
The motivation to modify the apparatus resulting from the combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim by using the deposition source of JP652880B1 in order to enhance the vacuum evaporation or the source material with n heat insulating function which the pipe and nozzles provide. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the apparatus resulting from the combined teachings of Park Jong Sung et al and Yonghwan Kim by using the deposition source of JP652880B1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 3,241,519 teaches a tensioned and cooled mask where a mask 11, deposition source (crucible 12, and substrate 17 are provided.
US 7,396,558 teaches a mask 20, evaporation source 534, and substrate holder 522, see Fig. 8B.
KR102505877 teaches a mask frame assembly with magnets 400.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYLVIA MACARTHUR whose telephone number is (571)272-1438. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5 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 571-272-1435. 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.
/SYLVIA MACARTHUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights