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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 9, 10, 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Higa, Kazutomo (US 20020157792 A1). Higa teaches a mask manufacturing device (Figures 8-12) for implementing a mask manufacturing method, comprising: an etching unit (Figures 8-12), comprising: a plurality of tubes (402a-f; Figure 8-12), arranged side by side and used for allowing an etching solution (“...an etchant as treating solution...”; [0123]) to be filled in the tubes (402a-f; Figure 8-12); and a plurality of nozzles (401; Figure 8-12; [0123]), arranged at intervals and staggeredly (Figure 8,13) on the tubes (402a-f; Figure 8-12), wherein the nozzles (401; Figure 8-12; [0123]) are communicated with the respective tubes (402a-f; Figure 8-12), and the nozzles (401; Figure 8-12; [0123]) are used to receive the etching solution (“...an etchant as treating solution...”; [0123]) from the respective tubes (402a-f; Figure 8-12) and respectively spray the etching solution (“...an etchant as treating solution...”; [0123]) with a spraying pressure (403a-f; Figure 8,9; [0123]); and a feeding unit (“conveyor speed”; [0215], “conveying”; throughout), for conveying a metal substrate to pass through the etching unit (Figures 8-12) to receive the etching solution (“...an etchant as treating solution...”; [0123]) sprayed by the nozzles (401; Figure 8-12; [0123]), as claimed by claim 1. The above and below italicized text are considered intended use claim requirements for the pending apparatus claims Further, it has been held that claim language that simply specifies an intended use or field of use for the invention generally will not limit the scope of a claim (Walter , 618 F.2d at 769, 205 USPQ at 409; MPEP 2106). Additionally, in apparatus claims, intended use must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim (In re Casey,152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto , 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); MPEP2115).
Higa further teaches:
The mask manufacturing device (Figures 8-12) according to claim 1, wherein each of the nozzles (401; Figure 8-12; [0123]) forms a spraying range (Figure 15-16; 45º-60º; [0007], [0074]) on a surface of the metal substrate when spraying the etching solution (“...an etchant as treating solution...”; [0123]), and the adjacent spraying ranges (Figure 15-16; 45º-60º; [0007], [0074]) are adjacently connected to each other, as claimed by claim 2
The mask manufacturing device (Figures 8-12) according to claim 1 further comprising a control unit (Figure 20; [0267]), for adjusting the spraying pressure (403a-f; Figure 8,9; [0123]) so that the nozzles (401; Figure 8-12; [0123]) can spray the etching solution (“...an etchant as treating solution...”; [0123]) with the same or different spraying pressures (403a-f; Figure 8,9; [0123]), as claimed by claim 6
The mask manufacturing device (Figures 8-12) according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of nozzles (401; Figure 8-12; [0123]) further include at least one first nozzle and at least one second nozzle, and the at least one first nozzle further sprays the etching solution (“...an etchant as treating solution...”; [0123]) with a first spraying pressure (403a-f; Figure 8,9; [0123]-”..can be set individually..”; abstract, ), the at least one second nozzle further sprays the etching solution (“...an etchant as treating solution...”; [0123]) with a second spraying pressure (403a-f; Figure 8,9; [0123]-”..can be set individually..”; abstract, ); wherein the first spraying pressure (403a-f; Figure 8,9; [0123]-”..can be set individually..”; abstract, ) is greater than the second spraying pressure (403a-f; Figure 8,9; [0123]-”..can be set individually..”; abstract, ), as claimed by claim 7. Higa’s independent pressure control requires a pressure gradient where the claimed inequality is present.
The mask manufacturing device (Figures 8-12) according to claim 1, wherein the etching solution (“...an etchant as treating solution...”; [0123]) further has a concentration of 40-50%, and contains ferric chloride ([0086]) and hydrochloric acid, as claimed by claim 9. The claim is considered a claim requirement of intended use in the pending apparatus claims. Further, it has been held that claim language that simply specifies an intended use or field of use for the invention generally will not limit the scope of a claim (Walter , 618 F.2d at 769, 205 USPQ at 409; MPEP 2106). Additionally, in apparatus claims, intended use must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim (In re Casey,152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto , 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); MPEP2115).
The mask manufacturing device (Figures 8-12) according to claim 1, wherein the nozzles (401; Figure 8-12; [0123]) arranged on each of the tubes (402a-f; Figure 8-12) are further arranged along a first direction (Applicant’s A1; Figure 2), and the adjacent nozzles (401; Figure 8-12; [0123]) arranged on the adjacent tubes (402a-f; Figure 8-12) are further arranged along a second direction (Applicant’s A2; Figure 2); wherein the second direction (Applicant’s A2; Figure 2) is non-perpendicular (parallel) to the first direction (Applicant’s A1; Figure 2), as claimed by claim 10
The mask manufacturing device (Figures 8-12) according to claim 1, wherein each of the nozzles (401; Figure 8-12; [0123]) is further capable of creating a solid cone-shaped spray (cone pattern from 401; Figure 8), as claimed by claim 13
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Higa, Kazutomo (US 20020157792 A1). The Examiner believes that Higa’s adjacent spraying ranges (Figure 15-16; 45º-60º; [0007], [0074]) provide overlap and thus satisfy the claimed the mask manufacturing device (Figures 8-12) according to claim 2, wherein the spraying ranges (Figure 15-16; 45º-60º; [0007], [0074]) are substantially circular (cone pattern from 401; Figure 8), and the adjacent spraying ranges (Figure 15-16; 45º-60º; [0007], [0074]) are overlapped at a position where the adjacent spraying ranges (Figure 15-16; 45º-60º; [0007], [0074]) are adjacently connected.
In the event that Higa’s adjacent spraying ranges (Figure 15-16; 45º-60º; [0007], [0074]) are not considered to overlap as claimed, then, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Higa to optimize Higa’s spraying ranges (Figure 15-16; 45º-60º; [0007], [0074]).
Motivation for Higa to optimize Higa’s spraying ranges (Figure 15-16; 45º-60º; [0007], [0074]) is for “uniform etching force” as taught by Higa ([0020]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higa, Kazutomo (US 20020157792 A1) in view of Cozac; Daniel et al. (US 4505781 A). Higa is discussed above and discusses “conveyor” concepts, however, Higa does not teach a conveyor belt. As a result, Higa does not teach the mask manufacturing device (Figures 8-12) according to claim 1, wherein the feeding unit (“conveyor speed”; [0215], “conveying”; throughout) comprises a conveyor belt for carrying and conveying the metal substrate, the etching unit (Figures 8-12) is arranged on opposite sides of the conveyor belt, and the nozzles (401; Figure 8-12; [0123]) spray the etching solution (“...an etchant as treating solution...”; [0123]) from the opposite sides of the conveyor belt, as claimed by claim 4
Cozac also teaches a liquid etching reactor (Figure 3) including a conveyor belt (60; Figure 3) for transporting Cozac’s substrates.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Higa to add Cozac’s conveyor belt.
Motivation for Higa to add Cozac’s conveyor belt is for conveying, as discussed by Higa, Higa’s “conveyed” (throughout) articles.
Claims 5, 8, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higa, Kazutomo (US 20020157792 A1). Higa is discussed above. Higa does not teach:
The mask manufacturing device (Figures 8-12) according to claim 1, wherein the adjacent tubes (402a-f; Figure 8-12) are 110-130 mm apart, and the adjacent nozzles (401; Figure 8-12; [0123]) on the each of the tubes (402a-f; Figure 8-12) are 75-85 mm apart, as claimed by claim 5
The mask manufacturing device (Figures 8-12) according to claim 1, wherein the spraying pressure (403a-f; Figure 8,9; [0123]) of each of the nozzles (401; Figure 8-12; [0123]) is 0.1-0.3 Mpa, as claimed by claim 8
The mask manufacturing device (Figures 8-12) according to claim 10, wherein the second direction (Applicant’s A2; Figure 2) further has a component (“...or at a certain angle..”; [0007]) in the first direction (Applicant’s A1; Figure 2) and a component (“...or at a certain angle..”; [0007]) in a third direction (Applicant’s A3; Figure 2), and the third direction (Applicant’s A3; Figure 2) is perpendicular to the first direction (Applicant’s A1; Figure 2); wherein an angle θ (“...or at a certain angle..”; [0007]) is formed between the first direction (Applicant’s A1; Figure 2) and the second direction (Applicant’s A2; Figure 2), and tan θ is greater than 3 or less than 3, as claimed by claim 11
The mask manufacturing device (Figures 8-12) according to claim 10, wherein the adjacent nozzles (401; Figure 8-12; [0123]) arranged on the adjacent tubes (402a-f; Figure 8-12) along the second direction (Applicant’s A2; Figure 2) are 120-145 mm apart, as claimed by claim 12
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Higa to optimize Higa’s nozzle orientations/positions and Higa’s nozzle pressures.
Motivation for Higa to optimize Higa’s nozzle orientations/positions and Higa’s nozzle pressures is for “uniform etching force” as taught by Higa ([0020]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Liquid etching processing apparatus with injected slurry includes US 20100326953 A1; US 20040209152 A1; US 20010024691 A1; US 20060170747 A1; US 3891491 A; US 5200025 A; US 12077870 B2; US 3808071 A; US 6193897 B1; US 8530359 B2
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Rudy Zervigon whose telephone number is (571) 272- 1442. The examiner can normally be reached on a Monday through Thursday schedule from 8am through 6pm EST. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Any Inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the Chemical and Materials Engineering art unit receptionist at (571) 272-1700. If the examiner cannot be reached please contact the examiner's supervisor, Parviz Hassanzadeh, at (571) 272- 1435.
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:/Awww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571) 272-1000.
/Rudy Zervigon/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
