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 of in the reply filed on 22 December 2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 4, 5, 7, 14, 18, and 19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Invention/Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 18 December 2023, 29 October 2024, and 28 June 2025 have been considered by the examiner.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-3, 6, 8-13, 15-17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted elements are: a component that measures the position of the droplet so that the position reproducibility of the droplet can be acquired by the controller. It is not clear how the position reproducibility of the droplet is determined/detected (i.e., is the droplet location measurement performed by the controller per se or by a measurement component that works in coordination with the controller?)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-3, 6, 8-13, 15, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ooshiro et al. (US 2009/0102876 – hereinafter Ooshiro) in view of Shibata (JP 2003-062987.)
Regarding claim 1,
Ooshiro discloses a substrate treating apparatus [1 / 1A in fig. 1] comprising:
a process treatment unit [5 / 6 / 7 / 8 in fig. 1] supporting a substrate [3 / 3a in fig. 1; paragraphs 0023-0026];
an inkjet head unit [2 / 12 in fig. 1] ejecting a substrate treating solution onto the substrate in the form of a droplet [paragraphs 0028-0029];
a gantry unit [11 in fig. 1] moving the inkjet head unit [paragraph 0028]; and
a control unit [21 in fig. 1] controlling the inkjet head unit [paragraphs 0033],
wherein the control unit determines whether to replace the inkjet head unit [paragraph 0061.]
Even though the disclosure teaches the control unit determining whether to replace the head unit based on an occurrence of satellite droplets (which are known to degrade the position reproducibility of droplets), Ooshiro fails to expressly disclose the determination by the control unit being based on a position reproducibility of the droplet.
Shibata discloses a print evaluation method and apparatus that evaluates the quality of the recording head using the standard deviation of the positional deviation amount for each nozzle, wherein the reproducibility of the dot position deviation amount is considered [paragraphs 0006, 0023-0024, and 0042-0046; claims 18, 19, 22, and 31.]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Ooshiro invention to include means for determining the quality of the inkjet head unit, and therefore when to replace it, based on a position reproducibility of the droplet as taught by Shibata for the purpose of having a data-driven approach to replacing inkjet heads, rather than relying on arbitrary time-based schedules, while ensuring a high-resolution and accurate printing operation.
Regarding claim 2,
In the obvious combination, Shibata further discloses wherein the control unit calculates statistical values based on positions of a plurality of droplets and determines whether to replace the inkjet head unit based on the statistical values [paragraphs 0042-0046; claims 19 and 31.]
Regarding claim 3,
In the obvious combination, Ooshiro further discloses wherein
the inkjet head unit includes a plurality of packs [12 in fig. 1],
each of the packs includes a plurality of head modules [2 in fig. 1],
each of the head modules includes a plurality of nozzles [paragraph 0022], and
the packs are classified into multiple groups depending on colors of the substrate treating solution [implicit from paragraph 0006.]
Regarding claim 6,
In the obvious combination, Shibata further discloses wherein the control unit calculates color-specific standard deviations for the packs and uses the color-specific standard deviations as the statistical values [paragraphs 0006, 0023-0024, and 0042-0046; claims 18, 19, 22, and 31; implicit and well-known that the determination will be made for each printhead / each color.]
Regarding claim 8,
In the obvious combination, Shibata further discloses wherein the control unit includes a droplet position acquisition module [10 in fig. 1], which acquires positions of a plurality of droplets, a statistical value calculation module [20 in fig. 1], which calculates statistical values based on the positions of the droplets, a comparison module [30 in fig. 1], which compares the statistical value with a threshold value, and a processing module [40 in fig. 1], which instructs the replacement of the inkjet head unit if the statistical values exceed the threshold value [paragraph 0009; as applied to the Ooshiro reference.]
Regarding claim 9,
In the obvious combination, Shibata further discloses wherein the statistical value calculation module calculates head-specific standard deviations for a plurality of head modules with a plurality of nozzles, pack-specific standard deviations for a plurality of packs with a plurality of head modules, and color-specific standard deviations by classifying the plurality of packs by color [paragraph 0043; if the standard deviation of the positional deviation amount for each nozzle is calculated, then it would be the same for a plurality of head modules, a plurality of packs, or by color.]
Regarding claim 10,
In the obvious combination, Shibata further discloses wherein the statistical value calculation module calculates the head-specific standard deviations, then the pack-specific standard deviations, and then the color-specific standard deviations [paragraph 0043; the nozzle is the smallest unit, so it is implicit that the standard deviation of the positional deviation amount for each nozzle is calculated first for the nozzle, then for the individual head, and then for the pack and by color.]
Regarding claim 11,
In the obvious combination, Shibata further discloses wherein the statistical value calculation module calculates the pack-specific standard deviations based on the head-specific standard deviations and calculates the color-specific standard deviations based on the pack-specific standard deviations [implicit from paragraph 0043; paragraph 0043; the nozzle is the smallest unit, so it is implicit that the standard deviation of the positional deviation amount for each nozzle is calculated first for the nozzle, then for the individual head, and then for the pack and by color.]
Regarding claim 12,
In the obvious combination, Shibata further discloses wherein the comparison module determines whether each of the head-specific standard deviations, pack-specific standard deviations, and color-specific standard deviations exceed the threshold value [paragraphs 0006, 0009, 0012, 0025, and 0051.]
Regarding claim 13,
In the obvious combination, Shibata further discloses wherein if any one of the head-specific standard deviations, pack-specific standard deviations, and color-specific standard deviations are determined to exceed the threshold value, the processing module instructs the replacement of a corresponding component within the inkjet head unit [paragraphs 0006, 0009, 0012, 0025, and 0051; as applied to the Ooshiro disclosure; if the quality of the recording head is determined, then it is implicit and well-known that the need for replacement of a head will be based on said quality determination.]
Regarding claim 15,
In the obvious combination, Ooshiro further discloses wherein the control unit determines whether to replace the inkjet head unit based on droplets ejected onto a dummy substrate [3a in fig. 1], which is provided separately from the substrate [as seen in fig. 1; paragraphs 0032 and 0043.]
Regarding claim 17,
In the obvious combination, Ooshiro further discloses the substrate treating apparatus further comprising:
a maintenance unit [1C in fig. 1] disposed near the process treatment unit for the inspection of the inkjet head unit [as seen in fig. 1; paragraphs 0022, 0032, 0052-0059],
wherein the control unit determines whether to replace the inkjet head unit using a dummy substrate [3a in fig. 1], which is provided in the maintenance unit [as seen in fig. 1; paragraphs 0061-0062.]
Regarding claim 20,
In the obvious combination, Ooshiro discloses a substrate treating apparatus [1 / 1A in fig. 1] comprising:
a process treatment unit [5 / 6 / 7 / 8 in fig. 1] supporting a substrate [3 / 3a in fig. 1; paragraphs 0023-0026];
an inkjet head unit [2 / 12 in fig. 1] ejecting a substrate treating solution onto the substrate in the form of a droplet [paragraphs 0028-0029];
a gantry unit [11 in fig. 1] moving the inkjet head unit [paragraph 0028]; and
a control unit [21 in fig. 1] controlling the inkjet head unit [paragraphs 0033],
wherein
the control unit determines whether to replace the inkjet head unit [paragraph 0061]
the inkjet head unit includes a plurality of packs [12 in fig. 1],
each of the packs includes a plurality of head modules [2 in fig. 1],
each of the head modules includes a plurality of nozzles [paragraph 0022],
the packs are classified into multiple groups depending on colors of the substrate treating solution [implicit from paragraph 0006],
whereas Shibata discloses wherein
the determination by the control unit being based on a position reproducibility of the droplet [paragraphs 0006, 0023-0024, and 0042-0046; claims 18, 19, 22, and 31],
the control unit includes a droplet position acquisition module [10 in fig. 1], which acquires positions of a plurality of droplets, a statistical value calculation module [20 in fig. 1], which calculates statistical values based on the positions of the droplets, a comparison module [30 in fig. 1], which compares the statistical value with a threshold value, and a processing module [40 in fig. 1], which instructs the replacement of the inkjet head unit if the statistical values exceed the threshold value [paragraph 0009; as applied to the Ooshiro reference],
the statistical value calculation module calculates head-specific standard deviations for a plurality of head modules with a plurality of nozzles, pack-specific standard deviations for a plurality of packs with a plurality of head modules, and color-specific standard deviations by classifying the plurality of packs by color [paragraph 0043; if the standard deviation of the positional deviation amount for each nozzle is calculated, then it would be the same for a plurality of head modules, a plurality of packs, or by color],
the statistical value calculation module calculates the pack-specific standard deviations based on the head-specific standard deviations and calculates the color-specific standard deviations based on the pack-specific standard deviations [implicit from paragraph 0043; paragraph 0043; the nozzle is the smallest unit, so it is implicit that the standard deviation of the positional deviation amount for each nozzle is calculated first for the nozzle, then for the individual head, and then for the pack and by color],
the comparison module determines whether each of the head-specific standard deviations, pack-specific standard deviations, and color-specific standard deviations exceed the threshold value [paragraphs 0006, 0009, 0012, 0025, and 0051],
if any one of the head-specific standard deviations, pack-specific standard deviations, and color-specific standard deviations are determined to exceed the threshold value, the processing module instructs the replacement of a corresponding component within the inkjet head unit [paragraphs 0006, 0009, 0012, 0025, and 0051; as applied to the Ooshiro disclosure; if the quality of the recording head is determined, then it is implicit and well-known that the need for replacement of a head will be based on said quality determination.]
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ooshiro in view of Shibata.
Regarding claim 16,
Ooshiro as modified by Shibata discloses the claimed limitations as set forth above but fails to expressly disclose wherein the dummy substrate is a hydrophobically coated substrate.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to use a hydrophobically coated dummy substrate, since it has been held to be within the ordinary skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use. Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). One would have been motivated to use a hydrophobically coated substrate for the purpose of prevents satellite drops from merging into the main droplet, while allowing for precise measurement of individual spot positions.
Communication with the USPTO
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANNELLE M LEBRON whose telephone number is (571) 272-2729. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Douglas X Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 431-0716. 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.
/JANNELLE M LEBRON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853