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 1-6 in the reply filed on June 8, 2026, is acknowledged.
Claims 7-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 June 8, 2026.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested:
Method for accurately adjusting an ADC camera based on a geometric relationship between a height variation value and a horizontal displacement of the ADC camera
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Fig. 5 appears to show a first acute angle “q,” but then a second and smaller acute angle is identified within the first acute angle and is labeled as “q + Dq.” It is unclear how a physically smaller angle that is located within a larger angle “q” can have a larger value defined by “q + Dq” unless, for example, Dq has a negative value.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
The “thermal field accessories” as recited in claim 1 and associated dependent claims is interpreted in light of at least Figs. 1-2 and ¶¶[0028]-[0031] of the published application as accessories within the Czochralski crystal growth system (1) that influence the temperature profile therein and includes, but is not limited to the thermal shield (50), cover plate (60), graphite (20) and quartz (30) crucibles, the heater (40), and the support shaft (70).
The “height variation value of an ADC camera” as recited in claim 1 is interpreted in light of at least Figs. 2 & 4 and ¶¶[0042]-[0047] of the published application as the amount DH by which a height position of the solid-liquid interface of the melt (MS) and, consequently, a position of the ADC camera (2) changes as a result of changes in the position of the thermal field accessories between different crystal growth runs.
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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “obtaining a horizontal displacement of the ADC camera” in l. 8. It is unclear whether this is the same as the horizontal displacement recited in ll. 7-8 of the claim or if it refers to a different horizontal displacement. For examination purposes it is assumed applicants intended to recite “obtaining the horizontal displacement of the ADC camera.” Dependent claims 2-6 are similarly rejected due to their dependence on claim 1.
Claim 1 further recites “the horizontal displacement” in l. 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is assumed applicants intended to recite “the horizontal displacement of the ADC camera.”
Claim 1 recites “based on a geometric relationship between the height variation value and a horizontal displacement of the ADC camera, obtaining a horizontal displacement of the ADC camera according to the height varication value, wherein the horizontal displacement is a first horizontal displacement or a second horizontal displacement.” It is unclear how the horizontal displacement of the ADC camera is determined based on a geometric relationship between the height variation value and the horizontal displacement of the ADC camera itself. It seems to be akin to saying A is determined based on A and B where A has a geometric relationship with B. In this case it is unclear how you determine A when it depends upon itself as this appears to involve circular reasoning because it begins with what it is trying to end with. Dependent claims 2-6 are similarly rejected due to their dependence on claim 1.
Claim 4 recites a process which involves “obtaining the first horizontal displacement DX1 of the ADC camera” while claim 5 recites another process which involves “obtaining the second horizontal displacement of the ADC camera.” However, it is unclear as to what is meant by “obtaining” the first or second horizontal displacement as claimed. Is a value calculated using the recited mathematical expressions such that the first or second horizontal displacement is “obtained” and nothing further is performed? If nothing further is performed then it appears as if claims 4-5 merely recite a mental process and do not modify the crystal growth process in any way. It is assumed applicants intend to recite, for example, that the ADC camera is actually moved by an amount which corresponds to the calculated values for the first and second horizontal displacement as claimed. Dependent claim 6 is similarly rejected due to its dependence on claim 4.
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.
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 35 U.S.C. 103 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 5,660,629 to Shiraishi, et al. (hereinafter “Shiraishi”) in view of U.S. Patent No. 3,998,598 to Anthony Bonora (“Bonora”).
Regarding claim 1, Shiraishi teaches a method for accurately adjusting an automatic diameter control (ADC) camera (see the Abstract, Figs. 1-4, and entire reference which teach a method for adjusting an image sensor (2)), comprising:
before pulling a monocrystalline silicon ingot, obtaining a height variation value of an ADC camera from a solid-liquid interface of a melt by comparing variations of thermal field accessories provided corresponding to the monocrystalline silicon ingot (see Figs. 1-4, col. 2, ll. 1-40, and col. 2, l. 65 to col. 3, l. 29 which teach that the sensing angle q of the line sensor (2) with respect to the initial melt surface position (3a) is calculated based on the raising amount of the crucible, the charging amount of the material, and the weight of the single-crystal semiconductor);
based on a geometric relationship between the height variation value and a horizontal displacement of the ADC camera, obtaining a horizontal displacement of the ADC camera according to the height variation value; wherein the horizontal displacement is a first horizontal displacement or a second horizontal displacement (see Figs. 2-4 and col. 3, l. 17 to col. 4, l. 18 which teach that as the melt surface falls a distance Dh from position (3a) to (3b) an adjusted sensing angle q’ can be obtained using the equation q’ = cos-1[(h+Dh)/{(h+Dh)2+r2}1/2]; moreover, the use of an adjusted sensing angle q’ necessarily involves a horizontal and/or vertical displacement of the camera).
Shiraishi does not explicitly teach that the height variation value of the ADC camera is obtained by separately comparing variations of thermal field accessories provided corresponding to the monocrystalline Si ingot and a previous monocrystalline Si ingot. However, since a Czochralski crystal growth system is repeatedly used to pull multiple different single crystal ingots, a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated to use the method of Shiraishi to continuously monitor the location of the crucible and the level of the melt during the growth of successive single crystal ingots. In this case it will be necessary to assess the position of at least the crucible as a result of growth of the previous Si single crystal as part of the process for establishing the location of the surface of the melt for each successive Si single crystal growth process. In this regard, variations in the position of thermal field accessories will necessarily be compared between each successive Si single crystal growth process as the starting location of the crucible and, consequently, the melt contained therein is assessed prior to making adjustments for each subsequent crystal growth process.
Shiraishi does not teach physically moving the ADC camera to a target position according to the horizontal displacement of the ADC camera. However, in Figs. 1-6 and col. 2, l. 59 to col. 5, l. 52 Bonora teaches an analogous system and method for crystal growth by the Czochralski method which involves making adjustments to the position of a pyrometer (40) based on changes in the location of the crystal-melt interface (42) during crystal growth in order to ensure that an ingot with a uniform diameter is produced. In Fig. 4 and col. 3, l. 50 to col. 5, l. 20 Bonora specifically teaches that to avoid changes in the diameter control during crystal growth the position of the pyrometer (40) may be adjusted such that it remains focused on the true level of the melt. As detailed in Figs. 3-4 and col. 4, l. 27 to col. 5, l. 20 this may be achieved by angularly or laterally moving the pyrometer (40) a predetermined distance based on changes in the level of the melt. Thus, a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated to horizontally displace the camera and/or line sensor (2) in the method of Shiraishi to a target position in response to changes in the level of the melt during crystal growth in order to ensure that the crystal diameter is accurately measured during the entire crystal growth process.
Regarding claim 2, Shiraishi and Bonora do not explicitly teach that that the variations of thermal field accessories provided corresponding to the monocrystalline silicon ingot and the previous monocrystalline silicon ingot include: a height variation of a thermal insulation cover plate in a monocrystalline puller, a length variation of a thermal shield, and a melt gap variation of the melt between pulling the monocrystalline silicon ingot and the previous monocrystalline silicon ingot. However, as noted supra with respect to the rejection of claim 1, since a Czochralski crystal growth system is repeatedly used to pull multiple different single crystal ingots, a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated to use the method of Shiraishi to continuously monitor the location of the crucible and the level of the melt during the growth of each successive single crystal ingot. In this case it will be necessary to assess the position of at least the crucible and, consequently, the Si melt level formed therein as a result of growth of the previous Si single crystal as part of the process for establishing the location of the surface of the melt for each successive Si single crystal growth process. In this regard, variations in the position of the melt level will necessarily be compared between each successive Si single crystal growth process.
Alternatively, since the location of structural features within a Czochralski crystal growth system such as the insulation surrounding the crucible, the heater, and one or more heat screens during any of a plurality of previous Si crystal growth processes may potentially block the line of sight of the camera (2) that is utilized to monitor the melt-solid interface, a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated to change the position of the camera (2) as a result of changes in the position of structural features within the crystal growth system, including a cover plate and thermal shield in order to ensure that the camera (2) has a clear and direct line-of-sight with the desired portion of the melt-solid interface during each subsequent Si crystal growth process.
Regarding claim 3, Shiraishi and Bonora do not explicitly teach that obtaining the height variation value of the ADC camera from the solid-liquid interface of the melt comprises: obtaining a height variation value Dh1 of the thermal insulation cover plate, a length variation value Dh2 of the thermal shield and a melt gap variation value Dh3 of the melt respectively, by comparing the variations of the thermal field accessories provided corresponding to the monocrystalline silicon ingot and the previous monocrystalline silicon ingot; and wherein when pulling the monocrystalline silicon ingot, according to the height variation value Dh1 of the thermal insulation cover plate, the length variation value Dh2 of the thermal shield and the melt gap variation value Dh3 of the melt, obtaining the height variation value DH = Dh1+Dh2+Dh3 of the ADC camera from the solid-liquid interface of the melt. However, as noted supra with respect to the rejection of claim 1, since a Czochralski crystal growth system is repeatedly used to pull multiple different single crystal ingots, a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated to use the method of Shiraishi to continuously monitor the location of the crucible and the level of the melt during the growth of each successive single crystal ingot. In this case it will be necessary to assess the position of at least the crucible and, consequently, the melt level as a result of growth of the previous Si single crystal as part of the process for establishing the location of the surface of the melt for each successive Si single crystal growth process. In this regard, since the location of the camera (2) is adjusted based on the location of the melt between successive Si crystal growth processes it necessarily is changed in response to DH which is itself necessarily derived from Dh1+Dh2+Dh3 as claimed.
Regarding claim 4, Shiraishi and Bonora do not teach that obtaining the horizontal displacement of the ADC camera based on the height variation value comprises: based on a geometric relationship between the height variation value and a first horizontal displacement of the ADC camera, obtaining a first correspondence relationship between the height variation value DH and the first horizontal displacement DX1 of the ADC camera: DX1=DH × tanq; wherein q represents an angle between a monitoring line of sight of the ADC camera and an outer wall of the monocrystalline silicon ingot in a vertical direction; according to the first correspondence relationship and the height variation value DH, obtaining the first horizontal displacement DX1 of the ADC camera. However, at least Fig. 2 and col. 3, ll. 17-28 of Shiraishi and Fig. 1 and col. 4, l. 27 to col. 5, l. 5 of Bonora teach that the velocity of the melt level and the adjusted sensing angle q’ may be obtained using expressions which depend on variables such as the original melt height h, the observed change in the melt height Dh, the radius of the crystal being pulled, the radius of the crucible, and the horizontal distance between the camera (2) and the scanning line r, and the like. In this regard it would have been within the capabilities of a PHOSITA prior to the filing date of the invention to utilize routine experimentation to determine the geometrical expression which calculates a first change in the horizontal position DX of the camera as claimed to ensure that a clear line of sight is maintained with the melt-crystal interface without any interference from internal chamber components such that accurate measurements of the diameter of the grown Si crystal can be obtained during the entire crystal growth process.
Regarding claim 5, Shiraishi and Bonora do not teach that obtaining the horizontal displacement of the ADC camera according to the height variation value comprises: when the ADC camera pivoted by an angle A6 in a horizontal direction, based on a geometric relationship between the height variation value and the second horizontal displacement of the ADC camera, obtaining a second correspondence relationship between the height variation value DH and the second horizontal displacement DX2 of the ADC camera: DX2=DH x tan(q+Dq); obtaining the second horizontal displacement of the ADC camera according to the second correspondence relationship and the height variation value. However, at least Fig. 2 and col. 3, ll. 17-28 of Shiraishi and Fig. 1 and col. 4, l. 27 to col. 5, l. 5 of Bonora teach that the velocity of the melt level and the adjusted sensing angle q’ may be obtained using expressions which depend on variables such as the original melt height h, the observed change in the melt height Dh, the radius of the crystal being pulled, the radius of the crucible, and the horizontal distance between the camera (2) and the scanning line r, and the like. In this regard it would have been within the capabilities of a PHOSITA prior to the filing date of the invention to utilize routine experimentation to determine the geometrical expression which calculates a second change in the horizontal position DX of the camera as claimed to ensure that a clear line of sight is maintained with the melt-crystal interface without any interference from internal chamber components such that accurate measurements of the diameter of the grown Si crystal can be obtained during the entire crystal growth process.
Regarding claim 6, Shiraishi does not explicitly teach that moving the ADC camera horizontally to the target position according to the horizontal displacement of the ADC camera comprises: moving the ADC camera to the target position horizontally according to the first horizontal displacement or the second horizontal displacement of the ADC camera. However, as noted supra with respect to the rejection of claim 1, in Figs. 1-6 and col. 2, l. 59 to col. 5, l. 52 Bonora teaches an analogous system and method for crystal growth by the Czochralski method which involves making adjustments to the position of a pyrometer (40) based on changes in the location of the crystal-melt interface (42) during crystal growth in order to ensure that an ingot with a uniform diameter is produced. In Fig. 4 and col. 3, l. 50 to col. 5, l. 20 Bonora specifically teaches that to avoid changes in the diameter control during crystal growth the position of the pyrometer (40) may be adjusted such that it remains focused on the true level of the melt. As detailed in Figs. 3-4 and col. 4, l. 27 to col. 5, l. 20 this may be achieved by angularly or laterally moving the pyrometer (40) a predetermined distance based on changes in the level of the melt. Thus, a PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention would be motivated to horizontally displace the camera and/or line sensor (2) in the method of Shiraishi to a target position in response to changes in the level of the melt during crystal growth in order to ensure that the crystal diameter is accurately measured during the entire crystal growth process.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH A BRATLAND JR whose telephone number is (571)270-1604. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday, 7:30 am to 4:30 pm EST.
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, Kaj Olsen can be reached at (571) 272-1344. 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.
/KENNETH A BRATLAND JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1714
Prosecution Insights