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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement(s) submitted November 21, 2023 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph 28, lines 4-5 refer to Figure 2A and state a first surface 21a and a second surface 21b are “substantially parallel to each other”, however upon inspection of Figure 2A, the surfaces 21a and 21b appear to be perpendicular to each other. The top surface of 27 is parallel to surface 21a.
Paragraph 28, line 17 refers to “silica” as “carbon dioxide” which appears to be a typo and should recite “silicon dioxide”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2009-142906 to Osamu (a machine translation will be referred to herein) in view of JP 2004-31772 to Tani (a machine translation will be referred to herein).
In Reference to Claim 1
Osamu teaches:
A dressing member (dresser board 50) for use in dressing grinding stones (21), comprising:
abrasive grits (not shown, abrasive grains, see paragraph 20, line 1); and
a binder (not shown, bonding agent, paragraph 20, line 2) fixing the abrasive grits (see paragraphs 18-20 and Figure 2).
Osamu fails to teach:
The abrasive grits are spherical.
Tani teaches:
A grinding apparatus (polishing pad 10) comprising abrasive grits (abrasive particles 13, silica), wherein the abrasive grits are spherical (see paragraph 20, lines 5-11 and Figure 1).
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 dressing member of Osamu by forming the abrasive grits as spheres as taught by Tani which is a simple substitution of one known element for another which yields predictable results. In this case, the predictable result is an abrasive particle which is spherical and contained within the binder. The spherical abrasive particle is made of silica and can be used for grinding.
In Reference to Claim 2#
Osamu as modified by Tani teaches:
The dressing member according to claim 1, wherein the abrasive grits are silica grits (paragraph 20 of Tani), and
the abrasive grits have a ratio of minor axis to major axis of 0.7 or greater. The grits are spherical and thus have a ratio of 1.0.
In Reference to Claim 4#
Osamu as modified by Tani teaches:
The dressing member according to claim 1, comprising the abrasive grits.
Tani further teaches the abrasive grits have an average grit size of 0.1 µm or greater but 3.5 µm or smaller (range is from 0.01 µm to 10 µm, paragraph 20, lines 7-8).
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 dressing member of Osamu as modified by Tani by sizing the average grit size to be between 0.1 µm and 3.5 µm as taught by Tani for the purpose of allowing the desired number of abrasive grit to be present in the binder and allowing the dressing member to have the desired abrasive ability.
In Reference to Claim 5#
Osamu as modified by Tani teaches:
The dressing member according to claim 1, wherein the binder is a vitrified bond or a resin bond (paragraph 22 of Osamu).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2009-142906 to Osamu as modified by JP 2004-31772 to Tani as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of WO 0214018 to Amano.
In Reference to Claim 3
Osamu as modified by Tani teaches:
The dressing member according to claim 1, comprising the abrasive grits.
Osamu as modified by Tani fails to teach:
The abrasive grits are contained at a content of 20% wt or higher ut 80% wt or lower.
Amano teaches:
A grinding device (abrasive article 10) comprising abrasive grits (abrasive grains), wherein the content of abrasive grit are contained at a content of 20% wt or higher but 80% wt or lower. Amano teaches the abrasive grain concentration is between 10%to 90%, and more preferably between 60% to 75% (see page 12, lines 8-11).
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 dressing member of Osamu as modified by Tani by forming the dressing member with the content of abrasive grits between 20% and 80% as taught by Amano for the purpose of tailoring the dressing member to grind the desirable amount using the desired number of abrasive grits.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. WO 2021/084706 to Hoshi et al teaches a polishing solution which uses spherical silica as an abrasive grain. JP 2019-84590 to Kakefuda teaches a dressing member comprising abrasive grits and a binder.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON GREGORY DAVIS whose telephone number is (571)270-3289. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 8:00-5:00, F: 8:00-12:00.
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, Nathan Wiehe can be reached at (571) 272-8648. 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.
/JASON G DAVIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/NATHANIEL E WIEHE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745