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 .
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishi et al. (U.S. Pat. 6997782) [Herafter “Nishi”] in view of Watanabe et al. (U.S. Pub. 2005/0130386) [Hereafter “Watanabe”].
Regarding claim 1, Nishi [Figs.3-8] discloses a method of manufacturing a display apparatus, the method comprising:
providing a polishing material on a base member [wafer 4] which is unpolished, a pressure at the surface of the base member which is unpolished defining an atmospheric pressure [Col.8 lines 44-50; Col.9 line 60 – col.10 line 9] [Pressures are different in the polishing area and in the cleaning area of polished wafers];
polishing a surface of the base member which is unpolished with the polishing material to provide a polished base member having the polishing material on a polished surface [Col.8 lines 19-28]; and
providing a pressure at the polished surface of the polished base member which is different from the atmospheric pressure [Col.8 lines 44-50; Col.9 line 60 – col.10 line 9] [Pressures are different in the polishing area and in the cleaning area of polished wafers].
Nishi fails to explicitly disclose the base member being a base member of the display apparatus. However, Watanabe discloses and makes obvious the polishing of a substrate, wherein the substrate being a base member of the display apparatus. It would have been obvious to provide the base member being a base member of the display apparatus, since it would have been obvious to apply one of the known methods with a reasonable expectation of success. KSR International Co. V, Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Claim(s) 2 and 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishi et al. (U.S. Pat. 6997782) in view of Watanabe et al. (U.S. Pub. 2005/0130386), as applied above and further in view of Jang et al. (U.S. Pat. 9409214) [Hereafter “Jang”].
Regarding claim 2, Nishi discloses wherein the polishing the surface of the base member comprises transferring the base member to a polisher of a manufacturing apparatus and transferring the polished base member from the polisher to outside the manufacturing apparatus, but fails to explicitly disclose using a roller in transferring the base member. However, Jang [Fig.1] discloses and makes obvious the method comprising transferring the base member using a roller [10]. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to substitute one transferring method for the other to achieve the predictable results. Further, it would have been obvious to apply one of the known methods with a reasonable expectation of success. KSR International Co. V. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claims 5, Nishi fails to explicitly disclose
wherein the providing the pressure comprises providing a suction pipe of a manufacturing apparatus facing the polished surface of the polished base member having the polishing material thereon and drawing a gas from around the polished base member into the suction pipe to provide the pressure at the polished surface which is different from the atmospheric pressure.
However, Jang [Fig.1] discloses a method
wherein the providing the pressure comprises providing a suction pipe [130] of a manufacturing apparatus facing the polished surface of the polished base member [SUB] having the polishing material thereon and drawing a gas from around the polished base member into the suction pipe to provide the pressure at the polished surface which is different from the atmospheric pressure.
It would have been obvious to provide the suction pipe as claimed, since it has been held that applying a known technique to a known process in order to yield predictable results would have been obvious. Further, it would have been obvious to try one of the known methods with a reasonable expectation of success. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claims 6-7, Jang [Figs.1-3] discloses the method
wherein the suction pipe comprises an inlet portion [SA1-3] through which the gas from around the polished base member is drawn into to the suction pipe, and
a wall of the suction pipe [130] at the inlet portion is inclined [Fig.3];
wherein the suction pipe comprises an inlet portion [SA1-3] through which the gas from around the polished base member is drawn into to the suction pipe, and
a cross-sectional area of the inlet portion of the suction pipe is greater than a total planar area of the surface of the base member [SUD] [Fig.1].
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishi et al. (U.S. Pat. 6997782) in view of Watanabe et al. (U.S. Pub. 2005/0130386), as applied above and further in view of James (U.S. Pub. 2007/0141312).
Regarding claim 3, Nishi fails to explicitly disclose moving the base member on a belt. However, James [Figs.1-2] discloses a method wherein the providing the polishing material on the base member comprises providing the base member on a belt [110] of a manufacturing apparatus with which the base member is movable along the manufacturing apparatus. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to substitute one conveying method for the other to achieve the predictable results. Further, it would have been obvious to apply one of the known methods with a reasonable expectation of success. KSR International Co. V. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Prior art does not fairly disclose or make obvious the claimed device/method taken as a whole, and specifically, the limitations of
at a polisher of a manufacturing apparatus, supplying a polishing material to a base member of the display apparatus and polishing the base member by using the polishing material, the polishing the base member providing a polished base member having the polishing material thereon;
transferring the polished base member from the polisher to a conveyer of the manufacturing apparatus which follows the polisher along the manufacturing apparatus; and
drawing a gas from around the polished base member which is at the polisher and the conveyer, into a suction pipe of the manufacturing apparatus which faces each of the polisher and the conveyer, to maintain the polishing material on the polished base member which is at the polisher and the conveyer.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claims 4 and 8-10 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: Prior art does not fairly disclose or make obvious the claimed device/method taken as a whole, and specifically, the limitations of
wherein the pressure at the polished surface of the polished base member is lower than the atmospheric pressure defined at the surface of the base member which is unpolished;
wherein the polishing the surface of the base member is performed at a polisher of a manufacturing apparatus which precedes the suction pipe along the manufacturing apparatus,
further comprising transferring the polished base member to an area outside the manufacturing apparatus which follows the suction pipe and includes the atmospheric pressure;
wherein the polishing material comprises a liquid, and the suction pipe drawing the gas from around the polished base member into the suction pipe to provide the pressure at the polished surface which is different from the atmospheric pressure, maintains the liquid in the polishing material on the polished surface at a level equal to or greater than about 90% of a total weight of the polishing material on the polished surface.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited prior art is considered analogous art and discloses at least some of the claimed subject matter of the current invention. However, the prior art does not fairly disclose or make obvious the claimed device/method taken as a whole.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAC H AU whose telephone number is (571)272-8795. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-6:00PM.
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, Jessica Manno can be reached at 571-272-2339. 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.
/BAC H AU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2898