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 .
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 1-2 and 5-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yanagita '668 (US 20010003668 A1) in view of Yonetani (JP 2003335454 A).
Regarding claim 1, Yanagita ‘668 discloses a semiconductor manufacturing device (Fig. 14, 400), comprising: a substrate support unit (203) configured to support a bonded substrate (30) including two substrates (10 and 20) bonded to each other; an arm portion (211) disposed adjacent the substrate support unit and configured to move toward and from a bonded portion of the bonded substrate (Shown); and a separating member (230) provided on an end of the arm portion (Shown) and configured to separate the two substrates by the arm portion entering the bonded portion (Shown best in Fig. 16), wherein the separating member includes a first inclined face (Fig. 15, 230a) and a second inclined face (230b) that extend toward the bonded portion (Shown) and are respectively extended from end portions of first and second faces of the separating member (see attached figure). However, Yanagita ‘668 does not disclose the separating member further including an aperture portion being configured to discharge a fluid toward the bonded portion.
On the other hand, Yonetani discloses wherein the separating member further includes an aperture portion (Fig. 3, 6) configured to discharge a fluid toward the bonded portion (Abstract "a fluid injection hole 6 is placed on a leading end portion of the scraper 4 to promote peeling of the adhesive 2 and the film 3 by injecting liquid or gas fluid toward the adhesive and the film"). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing of the invention to modify Yanagita ‘668 according to the teachings of Yonetani such that the separating member would further include an aperture portion configured to discharge a fluid toward the bonded portion in order to facilitate peeling the substrates apart smoothly (middle of pg. 5 “the peeled resin film layer 12 Is scooped up along the rake face S of the scraper 4 above the base material 1…, and at the same time by the gas pressure of the gas injected from the fluid injection hole 6… By peeling force… peeling is performed smoothly”).
Regarding claim 2, Yanagita '668 discloses wherein the first inclined face and the second inclined face are continuous in an end portion of the separating member (Shown in Fig. 15).
Regarding claim 5, Yanagita '668 discloses wherein the first and second inclined faces each include a resin material (Para. 209 "the wedge 210 made of a polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) resin was employed").
Regarding claim 6, Yanagita ‘668 discloses a separating member (Fig. 14, 230) used in a semiconductor manufacturing device configured to separate a bonded substrate (30) with two substrates (10 and 20) bonded to each other, wherein the separating member is provided on an end of an arm portion (211) that is disposed around a substrate support unit (203) supporting the bonded substrate and is configured to move toward and from a bonded portion (Shown in Fig. 14, the bonded portion being the interface between 10 and 20) of the bonded substrate, wherein the separating member includes a first inclined face (Fig. 15, 230a) and a second inclined face (230b) that extend toward the bonded portion (Shown) and are respectively extended from end portions of first and second faces of the separating member (see attached figure). However, Yanagita ‘668 does not disclose an aperture portion configured to discharge a fluid toward the bonded portion.
On the other hand, Yonetani discloses an aperture portion (Fig. 3, 6) configured to discharge a fluid toward the bonded portion (Abstract "a fluid injection hole 6 is placed on a leading end portion of the scraper 4 to promote peeling of the adhesive 2 and the film 3 by injecting liquid or gas fluid toward the adhesive and the film"). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing of the invention to modify Yanagita ‘668 according to the teachings of Yonetani such that the separating member would further include an aperture portion configured to discharge a fluid toward the bonded portion in order to facilitate peeling the substrates apart smoothly (middle of pg. 5 “the peeled resin film layer 12 Is scooped up along the rake face S of the scraper 4 above the base material 1…, and at the same time by the gas pressure of the gas injected from the fluid injection hole 6… By peeling force… peeling is performed smoothly”).
Regarding claim 7, Yanagita '668 discloses wherein the first inclined face and the second inclined face are continuous in an end portion of the separating member (Shown in Fig. 15).
Regarding claim 8, Yanagita '668 discloses wherein an angle formed between the first inclined face and the second inclined face is less than about 90° (Fig. 15 clearly shows the angle between the first inclined face 230a and the second inclined face 230b being an acute angle). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to form the first inclined face and the second inclined face within the claimed range, since it has been held by the Federal circuit that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device or provide any criticality, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. (In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984)).
Regarding claim 9, Yanagita '668 discloses wherein the first inclined face descends from the first face toward the bonded portion (Shown in Fig. 15).
Regarding claim 10, Yanagita '668 discloses wherein the second inclined face ascends from the second face toward the bonded portion (Shown in Fig. 15).
Regarding claim 11, Yonetani JP 2003335454 A discloses wherein the aperture portion includes a plurality of ejection holes (Fig. 3, gas injection nozzle 14).
Regarding claim 12, Yonetani JP 2003335454 A discloses wherein the plurality of ejection holes include at least one ejection hole formed in each of the first inclined face and the second inclined face (Shown in Fig. 14).
Claims 3, 13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yanagita '668 (US 20010003668 A1) in view of Yonetani (JP 2003335454 A) as applied to claims 1-2 and 5-12 above, and further in view of Yanagita '291 (US 20020070291 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Yanagita '668 in view of Yonetani discloses the semiconductor manufacturing device according to claim 1. However, Yanagita '668 in view of Yonetani JP 2003335454 A does not disclose wherein the arm portion has a sensor unit configured to detect a change in pressure around the bonded portion and the semiconductor manufacturing device further comprises a controller configured to adjust an amount of the fluid discharged based on a detection result provided by the sensing unit.
On the other hand, Yanagita '291 discloses the device having a sensor unit (Fig. 3, pressure gauge 210) configured to detect a change in pressure around the bonded portion (Pressure gauge 210 measures the pressure of the fluid which goes directly into the nozzle 120 to separate the substrate stack; para. 100 "The servo-driven pump 200 has a pressure gauge 210 for detecting the pressure of the fluid at the outlet"), and the semiconductor manufacturing device further comprises a controller (pressure controller 220) configured to adjust an amount of the fluid discharged based on a detection result provided by the sensing unit (Para. 101 "The pressure controller 220 drives the servo motor 201 on the basis of the output from the pressure gauge 210 provided at the outlet such that the variation in pressure of the fluid at the outlet (the pressure of the fluid to be supplied to the nozzle 120) is suppressed within a predetermined value"). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing of the invention to modify Yanagita ‘668 in view of Yonetani according to the teachings of Yanagita ‘291 such that the arm portion would have a sensor unit configured to detect a change in pressure around the bonded portion, and the semiconductor manufacturing device would further comprise a controller configured to adjust an amount of the fluid discharged based on the detection result provided by the sensing unit, in order to ensure the fluid isn’t over-pressurized to avoid damaging the substrates during separation.
Regarding claim 13, Yanagita '291 discloses wherein the controller configured to increase the amount of the fluid discharged based on the detection result (Para. 101 "The pressure controller 220 drives the servo motor 201 on the basis of the output from the pressure gauge 210 provided at the outlet such that the variation in pressure of the fluid at the outlet (the pressure of the fluid to be supplied to the nozzle 120) is suppressed within a predetermined value").
Regarding claim 15, Yanagita ‘668 discloses a semiconductor manufacturing device (Fig. 14, 400), comprising: a substrate support unit (203) configured to support a bonded substrate (30) including two substrates (10 and 20) bonded to each other; an arm portion (211) disposed adjacent the substrate support unit and configured to move toward and from a bonded portion of the bonded substrate (Shown); and a separating member (230) provided on an end of the arm portion (Shown) and configured to separate the two substrates by the arm portion entering the bonded portion (Shown best in Fig. 16), wherein the separating member includes a first inclined face (Fig. 15, 230a) and a second inclined face (230b) that extend toward the bonded portion (Shown) and are respectively extended from end portions of first and second faces of the separating member (see attached figure). However, Yanagita ‘668 does not disclose wherein the separating member further includes an aperture portion configured to discharge a fluid toward the bonded portion, and the arm portion has a sensor unit configured to detect a change in pressure around the bonded portion, and the semiconductor manufacturing device further comprises a controller configured to increase an amount of the fluid discharged based on a detection result.
On the other hand, Yonetani discloses wherein the separating member further includes an aperture portion (Fig. 3, 6) configured to discharge a fluid (Abstract "a fluid injection hole 6 is placed on a leading end portion of the scraper 4 to promote peeling of the adhesive 2 and the film 3 by injecting liquid or gas fluid toward the adhesive and the film") toward the bonded portion (Fig. 8, middle of pg. 8 "As shown by the arrow F2, the fluid ejecting hole 6 has a structure in which the fluid can be ejected toward the vicinity of the contact portion between the base material 1 and the adhesive 2"). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing of the invention to modify Yanagita ‘668 according to the teachings of Yonetani such that the separating member would further include an aperture portion configured to discharge a fluid toward the bonded portion in order to facilitate peeling the substrates apart smoothly (middle of pg. 5 “the peeled resin film layer 12 Is scooped up along the rake face S of the scraper 4 above the base material 1…, and at the same time by the gas pressure of the gas injected from the fluid injection hole 6… By peeling force… peeling is performed smoothly”).
Yanagita ‘668 in view of Yonetani still does not disclose and the arm portion having a sensor unit configured to detect a change in pressure around the bonded portion, and the semiconductor manufacturing device further comprising a controller configured to increase an amount of the fluid discharged based on a detection result. Yanagita ‘291 discloses the device having a sensor unit (Fig. 3, pressure gauge 210) configured to detect a change in pressure around the bonded portion (Pressure gauge 210 measures the pressure of the fluid which goes directly into the nozzle 120 to separate the substrate stack; para. 100 "The servo-driven pump 200 has a pressure gauge 210 for detecting the pressure of the fluid at the outlet"), and the semiconductor manufacturing device further comprises a controller (pressure controller 220) configured to adjust an amount of the fluid discharged based on a detection result provided by the sensing unit (Para. 101 "The pressure controller 220 drives the servo motor 201 on the basis of the output from the pressure gauge 210 provided at the outlet such that the variation in pressure of the fluid at the outlet (the pressure of the fluid to be supplied to the nozzle 120) is suppressed within a predetermined value"). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing of the invention to modify Yanagita ‘668 in view of Yonetani according to the teachings of Yanagita ‘291 such that the arm portion would have a sensor unit configured to detect a change in pressure around the bonded portion, and the semiconductor manufacturing device would further comprise a controller configured to adjust an amount of the fluid discharged based on the detection result provided by the sensing unit, in order to ensure the fluid isn’t over-pressurized to avoid damaging the substrates during separation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 4, the prior art of record does not disclose the semiconductor manufacturing device according to claim 1, further comprising: an imaging unit configured to acquire a captured image of the bonded portion; and a controller configured to adjust an amount of the fluid discharged based on a distance between the two substrates calculated based on the captured image. Specifically, the prior art does not disclose the image unit being configured to acquire a captured image of specifically the bonded portion between the two substrates.
For this reason, claim 14 would also be allowable as a dependent of claim 4 if claim 4 were rewritten in independent form including all limitations of the base claim.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pg. 7, filed 8/4/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of a new interpretation of the prior art. Specifically, Examiner agrees with the argument that the Office’s previous interpretation of Yanagita ‘668 was erroneous, however the combination of Yanagita ‘668 and Yonetani remedies the shortcomings of the previous non-final rejection. Yanagita ‘668 teaches an apparatus for a bonded substrate separation process as described above, but Yanagita ‘668 does not disclose the use of a fluid ejected from apertures in the wedge to aid the separation of the substrates. On the other hand, Yonetani explicitly teaches the use of a wedge used to aid the separation of films and substrates, analogously to Yaganita ‘668, but the wedge further comprising apertures used to eject a fluid which aids to smoothly separate the film from the substate without damaging either. The combination of Yanagita ‘668 and Yonetani therefore teaches the structure of claim 1 and a specific motivation to combine the two.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL J SMITH whose telephone number is (703)756-5706. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 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, Marlon Fletcher can be reached at (571) 272-2063. 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.
/S.J.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2817
/BRADLEY SMITH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817
