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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Claim 1 was amended to recite that the bubble date acquisitor is configured to derive representative values for each pixel from a plurality of images acquired by the imager to create image data and to acquire the bubble data based on the created image data.
The amendment to claim 1 necessitated the introduction of the prior art of JP2003071256A held to Okata teaches a membrane washing method and apparatus where the existence of bubbles was determined by a light and shade treatment of the image. See the paragraph that joins pages 2 and 3 where the “image information” refers to the positional information on an image and information on a color one such as color, hue, lightness, luminance, and saturation at each position or information on a distribution of such a color tone. See the second paragraph of page 6 which recites that for each sampled image the information such as brightness, luminance, and hue is converted into a numerical value for each pixel P.
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 1-3, 7-10, 13-15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuchiya et al (US 2019/0080937) in view of Okata JP2003071256A using the Machine Generated English Translation provided herewith).
The prior art of Tsuchiya et al teaches a substrate liquid processing apparatus, method, and recording medium.
Regarding claim 1: The prior art of Tsuchiya et al teaches a substrate liquid-processing apparatus comprising: a processing tank (processing tub 41) storing a processing liquid for liquid-processing of a substrate within an inside; an imager (see discussion of imaging unit 700 in [0149] see Fig. 17) configured to acquire an image of the processing liquid of the inside of the processing tank; and an image processor (control unit 7) comprising a bubble data acquisitor (control unit 7) configured to perform image processing on the image and to acquire bubble data (boiling state [0150] – [0152] in Tsuchiya et al.) representing a state of bubbles in the processing liquid. The prior art of Tsuchiya et al teaches that there is a relationship between the number of bubbles and the boiling state. Tsuchiya et al further teaches that the when the boiling state is stronger that concentration of the processing liquid is lower. According to [0152] of Tsuchiya et al the boiling state is determined based on images by using image processing software. Using this software, a differential image of the bubbles and the background image is produced. A new image is produced by taking the absolute value of the difference between pixel brightness (brightness per unit area) at same positions on the images.
Note that the prior art of Tsuchiya et al fails to teach the bubble date acquisitor (control unit 7 using the image processing software) is configured to derive representative values for each pixel from a plurality of images acquired by the imager to create image data and to acquire the bubble data based on the created image data.
The prior art of Okata teaches a membrane washing method and apparatus where the existence of bubbles was determined by a light and shade treatment of the image. See the paragraph that joins pages 2 and 3 where the “image information” refers to the positional information on an image and information on a color one such as color, hue, lightness, luminance, and saturation at each position or information on a distribution of such a color tone. See the second paragraph of page 6 which recites that for each sampled image the information such as brightness, luminance, and hue is converted into a numerical value for each pixel P.
See the second paragraph, page 6 of Okata where it is recited that information such as brightness, luminance, and hue for each sampled image is converted into a numerical value for each pixel P and position information is assigned to each pixel (step S4).
The motivation to modify the apparatus of Tsuchiya et al with the teachings of Okata to derive representative values for each pixel is that the data will lead to a more accurate analysis of the bubbling state due to more data points available (per pixel) vis per unit area. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the apparatus of Tsuchiya et al with the teachings of Okata to derive representative values for each pixel.
Regarding claim 2: The substrate liquid-processing apparatus of Claim 1, wherein the image processor comprises a boiling state determinator configured to determine a boiling state of the processing liquid based on the bubble data see [0150] – [0152] of Tsuchiya et al.
Regarding claim 3: The substrate liquid-processing apparatus of Claim 2, further comprising: an adjustment amount deriver (decompression unit 95, see abstract, [0007], [0050], [0062], [0064], [0066], [0068], [0077], [0092], [0119], [0120], [0122], [0128], [0132], [0135], [0137] and decompression 116, see [0070], [0071], [0077], [0092], [0094], [0098], [0104], [0105], [0106], [0108], [0113], [0115]) configured to derive adjustment data for a concentration of the processing liquid based on a determination result of the boiling state determinator (see discussion of boiling state in [0150] – [0152]. See discussion of the concentration measurement unit 55 in [0052] and [0056] see also concentration sensor 58 of Tsuchiya et al.
Regarding claim 7: Recall the prior art of Tsuchiya et al teaches a bubbler 70 configured to supply a gas to the processing liquid of the inside of the processing tank. See [0060] – [0067] and a bubbling controller (see gas supply unit 90 is controlled by supply valve 92 and the control unit 7) configured to control the bubbler, wherein the image processor comprises a bubbling state determinator configured to determine a state of the gas in the processing liquid based on the bubble data, and the bubbling controller is further configured to control the bubbler based on a determination result of the bubbling state determinator. See [0150] of Tsuchiya et al
Regarding claim 8: See the prior art of Tsuchiya et al and the rejection of claim 7 above. The substrate is the workpiece worked upon and is not structurally part of the apparatus and apparatus of Tsuchiya et al is capable of performing the limitations described whether or not the substrate is present note the prior art of Tsuchiya et al teaches an immersion control unit 114 see [0070], [0071], [0074], [0095], [0096] and see esp. [0139] where when gas and liquid control is discussed during vent and immersion periods. See also Figs. 15A and 15B of Tsuchiya et al.
Regarding claim 9: The substrate liquid-processing apparatus of Claim 7, wherein the bubble data acquisitor is further configured to acquire the bubble data by performing the image processing of the image acquired in a state in which a first substrate is immersed in the processing liquid, and the bubbling controller is further configured to control, based on the determination result of the bubbling state determinator, the bubbler to supply gas in the processing liquid in which a second substrate introduced into the processing tank after the first substrate is taken out from the processing tank is immersed in the processing liquid. See the rejection of claim 7 above and note that the substrate is the workpiece worked upon and is not structurally part of the apparatus and apparatus of Tsuchiya et al is capable of performing the limitations described whether or not the substrate is present note the prior art of Tsuchiya et al teaches an immersion control unit 114 see [0070], [0071], [0074], [0095], [0096] and see esp. [0139] where when gas and liquid control is discussed during vent and immersion periods. See also Figs. 15A and 15B of Tsuchiya et al. Regarding the discussion of the first and second substrates, see the carrier stock 12 where substrates are placed before and after processing. See also the discussion the lot (wafers that are to be immersed into the processing tub) in [0038] – [0043], [0069], [0074], [0079] – [0083]the lot processing unit 6, lot transfer device 19, and substrate elevating device 28 are work together to ensure the first and subsequent wafers are processed in the correct order based on the imager and bubbling state data. Note also the lot processing sequence section in [0090] – [0096] of Tsuchiya et al.
Regarding claim 10: See the rejection of claim 7 above and note that bubble data acquisitor is further configured to acquire the bubble data by performing the image processing of the image acquired in a state in which the substrate is immersed in the processing liquid, and the bubbling controller is further configured to control the bubbler to supply the gas into the processing liquid in which the substrate is immersed, based on the determination result of the bubbling state determinator. The prior art of Tsuchiya et al further teaches an immersion control unit 114 see [0070], [0071], [0074], [0095], [0096] and see esp. [0139] where when gas and liquid control is discussed during vent and immersion periods. See also Figs. 15A and 15B of Tsuchiya et al.
Regarding claim 13: See the rejection of claim 7 above. The prior art of Tsuchiya et al also teaches that the bubbling controller (see gas supply unit 90 is controlled by supply valve 92 and the control unit 7) is further configured to perform control by comparing the determination result of the bubbling state determinator with a reference model, and the reference model is determined based on an amount of the gas supplied into the processing liquid, a concentration of the processing liquid, and a temperature of the processing liquid. See the discussion of concentration in [0056], [0057],[0088], [0103], [0151] – [0153], [0155] and temperature of the processing liquid in [0055] . See the prior art of Tsuchiya et al does teach the images are put into a PC as database (reference model) and refers to the reference boiling state in [0152].
Regarding claim 14: See the rejection of claim 7 above. The prior art of Tsuchiya et al fails to teach that the bubbling controller (see gas supply unit 90 is controlled by supply valve 92 and the control unit 7) is further configured to perform control by comparing the determination result of the bubbling state determinator with specifically a reference table, and wherein the reference table associates the state of the gas in the processing liquid with an amount of the gas supplied into the processing liquid. See the prior art of Tsuchiya et al does teach the images are put into a PC as database (reference model) and refers to the reference boiling state in [0152]. Therein Tsuchiya et al does recite that the observed image is compared to a reference image. Such reference image is stored and referenced by Tsuchiya et al where that reference image is provided in a table or discrete point is conventional and obvious.
Furthermore, see paragraph 7 of page 6 of Okata where it is recited that the reference data can be represented in a table, conversion formula et al. According to Okata a table is used to store the difference between the observed value and the reference value. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the present invention to compare the determination result of the bubbling state determinator with specifically a reference table, and wherein the reference table associates the state of the gas in the processing liquid with an amount of the gas supplied into the processing liquid as suggested by the prior art of Okata.
Regarding claim 15: The substrate liquid-processing apparatus of Claim 1, wherein the bubble data includes data about at least one of a number, density, or size of bubbles. The data includes the number of bubbles according to [0150] of Tsuchiya et al.
Regarding claim 17: The substrate liquid-processing apparatus of Claim 1, wherein the imager is further configured to acquire the image of the inside of the processing tank from above. See Fig. 17 of Tsuchiya et al.
PNG
media_image1.png
702
712
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 17 of Tsuchiya et al
Claims 4-6, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuchiya et al (US 2019/0080937) in view of in view of Okata JP2003071256A using the Machine Generated English Translation provided herewith), as applied to claims 1-3, 7-10, 13-15, and 17 above, and in further view of Tanaka et al (US 2017/0358470).
Regarding claim 4: The apparatus resulting from the prior art of Tsuchiya et al as modified by the teachings of Okata was discussed above. Recall Tsuchiya et al teaches a substrate liquid-processing apparatus o further comprising: a bubbler (gas nozzles 70) configured to supply a gas to the processing liquid of the inside of the processing tank 41.
The apparatus resulting from the prior art of Tsuchiya et al as modified by the teachings of Okata fails to teach a notifier configured to perform a notification process, wherein the image processor comprises a bubbling state determinator configured to determine a state of the gas in the processing liquid based on the bubble data, and the notifier is further configured to perform the notification process based on a determination result of the bubbling state determinator.
The prior art of Tanaka et al teaches a substrate liquid processing apparatus where the control controls a supply pump of the processing liquid based on a signal (notifier) from the boiling state detecting unit (which provides bubble data) see abstract. The pressure of the supplied processing liquid is adjusted to adjust the phosphoric acid aqueous solution to the desired state. See also [0023] and [0070] of Tanaka et al. The motivation to modify the apparatus of Tsuchiya et al with the teachings of Tanaka et a to provide a notifier is that it enhances process control with better quality control of the boiling state. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify the apparatus of Tsuchiya et al and Okata with the teachings of Tanaka et a to provide a notifier to enhance quality control of the boiling state.
Regarding claim 5: The apparatus resulting from the prior art of Tsuchiya et al as modified by the teachings of Okata fails to teach the bubbling state determinator is further configured to determine the state of the gas in the processing liquid by comparing the bubble data with reference data based on a reference state of the gas in the processing liquid.
See [0068] of the prior art of Tanaka et al which teaches that the controller 7 compares the reference back pressure that is preset reference to the measurement to the measurement back pressure measured by the back pressure indicator 73, and determines the boiling state of the processing liquid. See also [0069] where it states that when the controller 7 determines that the boiling state of the processing liquid (L) is intense (FIG. 4A) by comparing the reference back pressure to the measurement back pressure, the controller 7 controls the supply pump 51 to increase the flow rate and pressure of the processing liquid. When the heating temperature of the processing liquid is constant, the increase of the pressure of the processing liquid (L) suppresses the evaporation of moisture, so that the amount of air bubbles (g) generated by the moisture evaporation is reduced and the boiling state of the processing liquid becomes gentle. The motivation to further modify the apparatus of The apparatus resulting from the prior art of Tsuchiya et al as modified by the teachings of Okata with the teachings of Tanaka et a to use a comparative analysis of the reference state of the gas in the processing liquid comparing the bubble data with reference data based on a reference state of the gas in the processing liquid enhance analysis of the date and ensures accuracy of the boiling state determination and informs how the processing liquid or process gas flow must be controlled. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the apparatus resulting from the prior art of Tsuchiya et al as modified by the teachings of Okata with the teachings of Tanaka et al to provide comparative analysis between the measured data and the reference data.
Regarding claim 6: The substrate liquid-processing apparatus of Claim 4 wherein the bubbling state determinator is further configured to determine, based on the bubble data, a gas state with reference to an entire range of the processing liquid and a gas state with reference to a local range of the processing liquid. See Tsuchiya et al is based on bubble data while Tanaka et al teaches a gas state with reference to an entire range of the processing liquid and a gas state with reference to a local range of the processing liquid. The motivation to determine the bubbling state based on either of these data ensures accurate measurement of the bubbling state. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the apparatus resulting from the prior art of Tsuchiya et al as modified by the teachings of Okata with the teachings of Tanaka et al to determine the bubbling state based on either of these data ensures accurate measurement of the bubbling state as suggested by the prior art of Tanaka et al.
Regarding claim 19: Recall Tsuchiya et al teaches a bubbler(gas nozzles 70) configured to supply a gas to the processing liquid of the inside of the processing tank. Regarding the notifier (see the prior art of Tanaka et al) configured to perform a notification process, wherein the image processor comprises a bubbling state determinator configured to determine a state of the gas in the processing liquid based on the bubble data, and the notifier is further configured to perform the notification process based on a determination result of the bubbling state determinator. See the rejection of claims 4 and 5 above.
Regarding claim 20: Recall Tsuchiya et al teaches a bubbler(gas nozzles 70) configured to supply a gas to the processing liquid of the inside of the processing tank. Regarding the notifier (see the prior art of Tanaka et al) configured to perform a notification process, wherein the image processor comprises a bubbling state determinator configured to determine a state of the gas in the processing liquid based on the bubble data, and the notifier is further configured to perform the notification process based on the determination result of the bubbling state determinator. See the rejection of claims 4 and 5 above.
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuchiya et al (US 2019/0080937) in view of in view of Okata JP2003071256A using the Machine Generated English Translation provided herewith), as applied to claims 1-3, 7-10, 13-15, and 17 above, and in further view of Ashidate et al (US 2018/0082862).
The teachings of Tsuchiya et al as modified by Okata were discussed above.
Regarding claim 11: The prior art of Tsuchiya et al as modified by Okata fails to teach a first bubbler and a second bubbler configured to supply a gas from different positions in a horizontal direction to the processing liquid of the inside of the processing tank; and a bubbling controller configured to control the first bubbler and the second bubbler, wherein the image processor comprises a bubbling state determinator configured to determine a state of the gas in the processing liquid based on the bubble data, and the bubbling controller is further configured to control the first bubbler and the second bubbler based on a determination result of the bubbling state determinator.
The prior art of Ashidate et al teaches a substrate processing device where a plurality of bubblers (bubble generators 12) is provided. According to [0021] of Ashidate et al the bubblers are controlled by control 15. According to [0032] – [0042] of Ashidate et al where the bubble generation state of each bubbler 12 is captured by the imager 25 and then controlled or adjusted by the control unit 15. The motivation to modify Tsuchiya et al as modified by Okata with providing a plurality of bubblers as suggested by Ashidate et al is that there can be a designated bubbler to a corresponding wafer and there can be individual control of each bubbler based on the bubbling state captured by the imager. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the Tsuchiya et al as modified by Okata with the teachings of Ashidate et al where a plurality of bubblers are provided so that there can be a designated bubbler to a corresponding wafer and there can be individual control of each bubbler.
Regarding claim 12: See the rejection of claim 11 above and notice in Fig. 3 wherein, at the inside of the processing tank, a spot where the first bubbler ejects a gas and a spot where the second bubbler ejects a gas are located opposite to each other with reference to a position where the substrate is disposed. Locating the bubblers from different positions in a horizontal direction allow such a spot to exist so that the bubbling generated from one of the bubblers does not interfere with the adjacent bubbler(s). Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the apparatus of Tsuchiya et al as modified by Okata with the teachings of Ashidate et al where a plurality of bubblers are provided so that there can be a designated bubbler to a corresponding wafer and there can be individual control of each bubbler.
PNG
media_image2.png
686
672
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 3 of Ashidate et al
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuchiya et al (US 2019/0080937) in view of in view of Okata JP2003071256A using the Machine Generated English Translation provided herewith), as applied to claims 1-3, 7-10, 13-15, and 17 above, and in further view of Estrella et al (US 2022/0405902).
The teachings of Tsuchiya et al as modified by Okata were discussed above.
The prior art of Tsuchiya et al as modified by Okata fails to teach the substrate liquid-processing apparatus of Claim 1, wherein the bubble data acquisitor is further configured to acquire the bubble data based on a gray value of the image.
The prior art of Estrella et al teaches wafer bath imaging using camera 112 see [0029] where the camera is operated at any visual spectrum such as gray scale or RGB. The motivation to modify the prior art of Tsuchiya et al with the camera of Estrella et al it allows for images that are in color or in gray scale so that the data can be viewed accurately from any monitor. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Tsuchiya et al as modified by Okata with the camera of Estrella et al it allows for images that are in color or in gray scale.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuchiya et al (US 2019/0080937) in view of in view of Okata JP2003071256A using the Machine Generated English Translation provided herewith), as applied to claims 1-3, 7-10, 13-15, and 17 above, in further view of Yoshio Akasaka (KR100193733 held to using the Machine Generated English Translation provided herewith).
The teachings of Tsuchiya et al as modified by Okata were discussed above.
The prior art of Tsuchiya et al as modified by Okata fails to teach the imager is further configured to acquire the image of the inside of the processing tank from a side.
The prior art of Yoshio Akasaka teaches a wafer cleaning apparatus with an inner tank 111 and outer tank 112 see Fig. 2 where photosensor 200 (imager) is provided to acquire the image of the inside of the processing tank from a side. The motivation to locate the imager as suggested by the prior art of Yoshio Akasaka is that it will be away from the bubbler and the formation of the bubbles. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the imager of Tsuchiya et al as modified by Okata to locate the imager as suggested by the prior art of Yoshio Akasaka is that it will be away from the bubbler and the formation of the bubbles that could lessen the accuracy of the images.
PNG
media_image3.png
368
491
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2 of Yoshio Akasaka
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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