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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (Claims 1-7) in the reply filed on 01/29/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 8-11 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 01/29/2026.
Claim 8-11 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/29/2026.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/13/2023, 08/08/2024, 11/20/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 5, 6, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kimba (US 2020/0001424).
Kimba discloses:
[Claim 1] A polishing pad, which comprises a top pad layer (150), wherein the top pad layer comprises a light transmitting region (152) for monitoring a change in the state of the polishing pad (paragraph [0078] discloses determining a wear level of the polishing pad 150 by calculating a deterioration level of the light transmitting region 152).
[Claim 4] The polishing pad of claim 1, wherein a change in the thickness, or a change in the surface roughness, of the polishing pad is monitored through a change in the thickness, or a change in the surface roughness, of the light transmitting region (paragraph [0077]).
[Claim 5] The polishing pad of claim 1, wherein the light transmitting region has at least one surface shape selected from the group consisting of polygons, circles, rings, and spirals (light transmitting region 152 is circular as seen in the Figures).
[Claim 6] The polishing pad of claim 1, which further comprises a window region distinguished from the light transmitting region (Fig. 10 shows two window regions, one is interpreted to be the light transmitting region and the other is interpreted to be a window region that is distinguished from the light transmitting region).
[Claim 7] The polishing pad of claim 6, which further comprises a partition wall between the light transmitting region and the window region (Fig. 10, there is a partition wall between the two regions 152).
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) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gunzman et al. (US 11633830).
Regarding claim 1, Gunzman discloses a polishing pad (10), which comprises a top pad layer (15), wherein the top pad layer comprises a light transmitting region (14).
Gunzman does not explicitly disclose that the light transmitting region/window is for monitoring a change in the state of the polishing pad.
However, Kimba discloses a polishing pad system similar to Gunzman and the present application and therefore constitutes analogous art, which comprises a top pad layer (150), wherein the top pad layer comprises a light transmitting region (152) for monitoring a change in the state of the polishing pad (paragraph [0078] discloses determining a wear level of the polishing pad 150 by calculating a deterioration level of the light transmitting region 152).
It is obvious to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(A). The MPEP states the prior art must: (1) teach each claimed element (a method or apparatus that will be modified), (2) show that one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements by known methods and that the combination doesn’t change the function of the elements, and (3) show that one of ordinary skill would have recognized that applying the known technique to the base device would yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(A).
In this case, Gunzman teaches all elements except that the light transmitting region/window is for monitoring a change in the state of the polishing pad. Kimba teaches using the light transmitting region/window for monitoring a change in the state of the polishing pad, which has the function of allowing it to be known when to replace the polishing pad due to wear. When combined into Gunzman by using the light transmitting region/window for monitoring a change in the state of the polishing pad using the associated techniques of Kimba, it maintains its function of allowing it to be known when to replace the polishing pad. One of ordinary skill would expect predictable results because both references pertain to polishing pads with light transmitting regions/windows that function in the same manner in the environment of polishing systems pertinent to polishing substrates.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Gunzman in view of Kimba because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
The combination of Gunzman and Kimba further renders obvious:
[Claim 2] The polishing pad of claim 1, wherein the top pad layer has physical properties at the same level as those of the light transmitting region (Gunzman Col. 10 states top pad layer and the light transmitting region window can have the same physical property Young's modulus according to ASTM D412-16 of at least 10).
[Claim 3] The polishing pad of claim 2, wherein the light transmitting region comprises: a light transmitting polymer (Gunzman Col. 9 lines 54-67 and Col. 10 lines 1-20) region having physical properties at the same level as those of the top pad layer (Gunzman Col. 10); and a light reflector provided below the light transmitting polymer region (Gunzman without an established frame of reference, the structure that reflects the light can be interpreted to be below the light transmitting polymer region).
[Claim 4] The polishing pad of claim 1, wherein a change in the thickness, or a change in the surface roughness, of the polishing pad is monitored through a change in the thickness, or a change in the surface roughness, of the light transmitting region (obvious in light of Kimba paragraph [0077]; the modified system of Gunzman would determine a change in the surface of the polishing pad from the wear on the light transmitting region using light sensors, etc.).
[Claim 5] The polishing pad of claim 1, wherein the light transmitting region has at least one surface shape selected from the group consisting of polygons, circles, rings, and spirals (Gunzman surface 19 of the light transmitting region 14 is a polygon).
[Claim 6] The polishing pad of claim 1, which further comprises a window region distinguished from the light transmitting region (absent further limitations on what “distinguished” requires, Gunzman, window region 17 or 18 appears to be distinguished from the light transmitting region 14 or 19).
Claim(s) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimba in view of Gunzman.
Regarding claim 2 and 3, Kimba discloses the polishing pad of claim 1, and further discloses: wherein the light transmitting region comprises: and a light reflector (Kimba, 123 "reflection light optical fiber", Fig. 10, paragraph [0081]) provided below the light transmitting polymer region.
Kimba does not explicitly disclose wherein the top pad layer has physical properties at the same level as those of the light transmitting region or a light transmitting polymer region having physical properties at the same level as those of the top pad layer.
However, Gunzman discloses a polishing pad system similar to Kimba and the present application and therefore constitutes analogous art. Gunzman discloses a polishing pad (10), which comprises a top pad layer (15), wherein the top pad layer comprises a light transmitting region (14) for monitoring a change in the state of the polishing pad; wherein the top pad layer has physical properties at the same level as those of the light transmitting region (Col. 10 states top pad layer and the light transmitting region window can have the same physical property Young's modulus according to ASTM D412-16 of at least 10; absent further limitations on what physical properties, the fact that they are both rigid structures also constitutes a physical property).
Since using a top pad layer has physical properties at the same level as those of the light transmitting region and a light transmitting polymer region having physical properties at the same level as those of the top pad layer is a known technique in the art, and since Kimba remains silent as to its specific materials used for its light transmitting region, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the device of Kimba to have used using a top pad layer has physical properties at the same level as those of the light transmitting region and a light transmitting polymer region having physical properties at the same level as those of the top pad layer as taught by Gunzman as a matter applying a known technique to a known device to yield the predictable result of a functioning polishing pad having a light transmitting polymer region that functions as originally disclosed in the primary reference Kimba. Changing the material of the pad and the window/light transmitting region to have some same physical properties would not change the primary function of Kimba.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kinoshita et al. (US 11673224) discloses a removable light transmitting member 151 when it is worn, discusses when it becomes warn, it changes the light transmission which leads to issues
Matsuo et al. (US 10401285) discloses measuring surface properties of a polishing pad using a laser light and the refracting light beam
Kobata et al. (US 9401293) discloses a pertinent polishing pad with a light applying unit, and light sensor, used to determine a thickness
Weldon et al. (US 6805613) discloses a multiprobe detection system for a polishing pad, and discloses that increasing the number of points sampled when more than one probe is under the wafer is advantageous in situations where a wafer does not remain over the same area of a polishing pad.
Gadinski et al. (US 11325221) Gadinski discloses: a transparent window that lets light be transmitted through it and measuring the fluorescence through it to determine thickness of the polishing pad
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Dustin T Nguyen whose telephone number is (571)270-0163. The examiner can normally be reached M - F: 8:00am - 4:30pm.
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, Nathaniel E. 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.
/DUSTIN T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745 March 19, 2026
Prosecution Insights