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 12/01/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Notification regarding 35 USC § 112f
The following is a quotation of AIA 35 U.S.C. 112f:
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.
In claim 1: Claim limitations
“an attenuator for regulating output power of the laser beam…” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), because it uses/they use a generic placeholder “an attenuator” coupled with functional language “for regulating output power of the laser beam …” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
“a beam condenser for converging the laser beam emitted by the laser oscillator…” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), because it uses/they use a generic placeholder “a beam condenser” coupled with functional language “for converging the laser beam emitted by the laser oscillator …” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
“a plane-of-polarization rotating unit disposed between the attenuator and the beam condenser…” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), because it uses/they use a generic placeholder “a plane-of-polarization rotating unit” coupled with functional language “disposed between the attenuator and the beam condenser …” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
“a beam splitter disposed between the plane-of-polarization rotating unit and the attenuator…” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), because it uses/they use a generic placeholder “a beam splitter” coupled with functional language “disposed between the plane-of-polarization rotating unit and the attenuator …” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
“an observing unit for observing the returning beam branched by the beam splitter…” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), because it uses/they use a generic placeholder “an observing” coupled with functional language “for observing the returning beam branched by the beam splitter…” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
“an adjusting unit for adjusting a position of the beam condenser…” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), because it uses/they use a generic placeholder “an attenuator” coupled with functional language “for regulating output power of the laser beam …” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Since the claim limitation(s) invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f), claim 1 has been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that, although it is not clear, the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112f:
“an attenuator” is well known as any kind of device that reduces the power or amplitude of a signal (whether electronic, optical, or acoustic) without noticeably distorting its original waveform…
“a beam condenser” is “…beam condenser 58 that includes a condensing lens 58a for focusing the laser beam LB1 and applying the focused laser beam LB1 …” as described in the present Specification, Par.0032.
“a plane-of-polarization rotating unit” is “…plane-of-polarization rotating unit 57 according to the present embodiment represents means for rotating the plane of polarization of a linearly polarized beam applied thereto, and preferably is a known Faraday rotator, for example. However, the plane-of-polarization rotating unit 57 according to the present invention is not limited to such a Faraday rotator, and may alternatively be another component having the same function, e.g., a quarter-wave plate…” as described in the present Specification, Par.0032.
“a beam splitter” is well known as an optical device that divides a single beam of light into two or more separate paths…
“an observing unit” is “…observing unit 59 is what is generally called a shearing interferometer, for example…” as described in the present Specification, Par.0034.
“an adjusting unit” is “…adjusting unit 60 may be a voice-coil motor or a linear motor, for example…” as described in the present Specification, Par.0032.
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not intend to have the claim limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f), or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
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.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention.
In claim 1, the limitation “a laser beam” as cited in lines 7-8, is indefinite because it is unclear “a laser beam” in lines 7-8, is the same “a laser beam” in lines 4-5 or not? Correction is required. If it is the same, “a laser beam” in lines 7-8, should be changed to --the laser beam--.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived 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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yazaki et al. (US 20050070035 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Yazaki discloses
A laser processing apparatus (optical system and a control system of a laser annealing apparatus, fig.1) [Par.0051 cited: “…optical system and a control system of a laser annealing apparatus suitable for carrying out a method for manufacturing a display pane…”] comprising:
a chuck table (stage 9, fig.1) for holding a workpiece (substrate 10, fig.1) thereon; and
a laser beam applying unit (laser oscillator 3, ND filter 5, EO modulator 6, objective lens 11, half mirror 22, camera 19, fig.1) for applying a laser beam (laser beam 4, fig.1) to the workpiece (substrate 10) held on the chuck table (stage 9), wherein the laser beam applying unit includes:
a laser oscillator (laser oscillator 3, fig.1) for emitting the laser beam (laser beam 4),
an attenuator (ND filter 5, fig.1) for regulating output power of the laser beam (laser beam 4),
a beam condenser (objective lens 11, fig.1) for converging the laser beam emitted by the laser oscillator (laser oscillator 3) and applying the converged laser beam (laser beam 4) to the workpiece (substrate 10) held on the chuck table (stage 9),
a plane-of-polarization rotating unit (EO modulator 6, fig.1) disposed between the attenuator (ND filter 5) and the beam condenser (objective lens 11) for rotating a plane of polarization of the laser beam (laser beam 4) [Par.0057 cited: “…when a voltage V2 with which the laser beam 4 penetrating the crystal of the EO modulator 6 can be rotated at an angle of 90 degrees is applied, the polarization direction of the laser beam 4 rotates at an angle of 90 degrees…”],
a beam splitter (half mirror 22, fig.1);
an observing unit (camera 19, fig.1) for observing the returning beam branched by the beam splitter (half mirror 22), and
an adjusting unit (adjustment, Par.0053) for adjusting a position of the beam condenser (objective lens 11) in order to focus a spot of the laser beam (laser beam 4) on the upper surface of the workpiece (substrate 10) according to a configuration of the returning beam observed by the observing unit (camera 19) [Par.0053 cited: “…TV camera 19 and so on are provided for alignment between the laser beam and the substrate 10 on the stage 9 and adjustment of the shape of the laser beam passing through the rectangular slit 8…”].
However, Yazaki does not disclose a beam splitter disposed between the plane-of-polarization rotating unit and the attenuator thereto.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to relocate a beam splitter as taught by Yazaki, disposed between the plane-of-polarization rotating unit and the attenuator, in order to branch a returning beam reflected from an upper surface of the workpiece when the laser beam is applied, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
PNG
media_image1.png
633
1047
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Yazaki discloses
the laser beam applying unit (laser oscillator 3, ND filter 5, EO modulator 6, objective lens 11, half mirror 22, camera 19, fig.1) further includes: a half-wave plate (half mirror 20, fig.1) disposed between the beam splitter (half mirror 22, fig.1) and the laser oscillator (laser oscillator 3, fig.1) for adjusting the plane of polarization of the laser beam to convert the laser beam into a P-polarized beam with respect to the beam splitter (half mirror 22), and an expander (beam expander, Par.0055) for adjusting the laser beam (laser beam 4, fig.1) to a collimated beam [Par.0055 cited: “…beam diameter may be expanded to be close to the effective diameter of the EO modulator 6 by a beam expander (not shown) in consideration of the power resistance of the EO modulator 6…”].
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yazaki et al. (US 20050070035 A1) in view of Kempter et al. (US 4809014).
Regarding claim 3, Yazaki discloses substantially all the features as set forth above, such as the observing unit (camera 19, fig.1), but does not disclose it is a shearing interferometer.
Kempter discloses a laser processing apparatus (apparatus, fig.5b) comprises an observing unit is a shearing interferometer (shearing-interferometer eyepiece 38, fig.5b).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to replace an observing unit of Yazaki, by using a shearing interferometer, as taught by Kempter, in order to measure the deviation.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Abe (US 20080129950 A1) is considered as the relevant prior art in field of a laser apparatus, as shown in fig.1, with a chuck table, a workpiece, a laser beam applying unit, a laser oscillator, an attenuator, a beam condenser…, but does not disclose an observing unit, and a plane-of-polarization rotating unit…
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHUONG T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1834. The examiner can normally be reached 9.00am-5.00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven Crabb can be reached on 571-270-5095. 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.
/PHUONG T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
07/13/2026
Prosecution Insights