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 § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-7, and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takanashi et al (JP 2017/105654), an English computer translation (CT) is provided.
Takanashi et al teaches a manufacturing method of a single crystal by the Czochralski method that pulls up a single crystal 3 from a melt 2 in a crucible 11 (Fig 1; CT [0018]-[0022], [0030]) comprising: providing a heat shielding body 17 that covers an area above the crucible 11 except for a pulling-up path of the single crystal 3; capturing a real image of the heat shielding body and a mirror image 17’ of the heat shielding body reflected on a melt surface of the melt by a first camera 20 (CT [0048] ; setting a detection line extending in an oblique direction that is neither parallel nor perpendicular to a pulling-up axis of the single crystal and intersects both a real image edge and a mirror image edge of the heat shielding body (CT [0048]); and finding a gap value, which is a distance between a lower end of the heat shielding body and the melt surface based on a distance on the detection line between the real image and the mirror image, which is a distance from a first intersection point of the detection line and the real image edge to a second intersection point of the detection line and the mirror image (CT [0048] teaches when the gap width from the lower end of the heat shield 17 to the surface of the silicon molten liquid 2 is relatively wide, the distance D from the edge 17ae of the opening 17a of the real image of the heat shield 17 to the edge 17'ae of the mirror image 17' of the heat shield 17 becomes longer, and when the gap width is relatively narrow, the distance D becomes shorter; and calculating the measured distance between the actual image of the heat shield 17 present in the observation area and the mirror image 17' of the heat shield reflected on the surface of the silicon molten liquid to determine, the gap width from the lower end of the heat shield 17 to the surface of the silicon molten liquid 2 (CT [0047]-[0073]). Takanashi et al teaches a control unit 22 controls the vertical position of the quartz crucible 11 so that the liquid level (gap width) remains constant (CT [0046]).
Referring to claims 2, and 7, Takanashi et al teaches an optical axis of the first camera 20 is in a twisted positional relationship, not in the same plane as a pulling-up axis of the single crystal (Fig 1 and 5 depicts camera 20 at an angle θ to the pulling axis; CT [0021]-[0024] teaches viewing angle θ with respect to the pulling axis is preferably 10 to 40°).
Referring to claims 4 and 9, Takanashi et al teaches a conversion formula (equation 1 and equation 2) is prepared in advance, that indicates a relationship between distance on the detection line between the real image and the mirror image and the gap value when a liquid surface level of the melt is arbitrarily changed by lifting and lowering the crucible before starting to pull up the crystal, and calculates the gap value using the actually measured distance between the real image and the mirror image, and conversion table or conversion formula during a step of pulling-up of the crystal. (Fig 3; CT [0047]-[0073] teaches measuring the gap using the mirror image of the heat shield, the real image of the heat shield, the distance D from the edge of the real image of the heat shield and the mirror image of the heat shield; measuring the actual gap width using a quartz pin method)
PNG
media_image1.png
78
160
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
76
328
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Referring to claims 5 and 10, Takanashi et al teaches a standard liquid surface level is obtained by observing a contact between a measuring pin arranged above the melt and the melt surface, and prepares the conversion table or the conversion formula based on the standard liquid surface level (CT [0047]-[0073] teaches measuring the gap using the mirror image of the heat shield, the real image of the heat shield, the distance D from the edge of the real image of the heat shield and the mirror image of the heat shield, and distance Gc corresponds to distance D in Fig 3; measuring the actual gap width using a quartz pin method).
Referring to claim 6, see remarks above regarding claim 1. Also ,Takanashi et la teaches a single crystal manufacturing device comprising: a crucible 11 supporting a melt 2; a crucible driving mechanism 14 that rotates and drives elevation of the crucible; a heater 15 for heating the melt in the crucible; a cylindrical heat shielding body 17 arranged in an area above the crucible except for a pulling-up path of the single crystal; a first camera 20 that captures a real image of the heat shielding body and a mirror image of the heat shielding body reflected on a liquid surface of the melt; an image processor 21 that processes an image captured by the first camera to obtain a gap value between a lower end of the heat shielding body and a melt surface; and a controller 22 that controls a level of the liquid surface of the melt based on a processing result of the captured image by the image processor, wherein the image processor sets, while capturing the image, a detection line extending in an oblique direction that is neither parallel nor perpendicular to a pulling-up axis of the single crystal and intersects both a real image edge and a mirror image edge of the heat shielding body; and finds a gap value, which is a distance between a lower end of the heat shielding body and the melt surface based on a distance on the detection line between the real image and the mirror image, which is a distance from a first intersection point of the detection line and the real image edge to a second intersection point of the detection line and the mirror image (CT [0030]-[0073]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 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.
Claim(s) 3 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takanashi et al (JP 2017/105654), an English computer translation (CT) is provided, as applied to claims 1, 2, 4-7, and 9-10 above, and further in view of Takanashi et al (US 2005/0022722).
Takanashi et al (JP ‘654) teaches all of the limitations of claim 3, as discussed above, except a diameter of the single crystal is measured using an image captured by a second camera provided separately from the first camera.
In a Czochralski crystal growth apparatus, Takanashi et al (US ‘722) teaches measuring of the actual level position of the melt uses a first camera of the optical device and measuring of the diameter of the single crystal uses a second camera 11 connected to diameter measuring means 8), wherein a second CCD camera specifically for measuring the level position can be placed beside the one-dimensional CCD camera 11 for the diameter measuring means 8 (claim 7; [0029]-[0035]). Takanashi et al also teaches a conversion equation of the mirror image position of the reference reflector 12 to the level position in the actual setting situations of the one-dimensional CCD camera 11 and the reference reflector 12 is required, and the conversion equation can be obtained by moving the crucible 21 up and down to change the level position; and an automatic updating means 18 to automate the activity of working out the conversion equation to automatically find the conversion equation before pulling the single crystal 36 using the automatic updating means 18 ([0060]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Takanashi et al (JP ‘654) by a using a second camera to measure the diameter of the single crystal using an image captured by a second camera provided separately from the first camera, as taught by Takanashi et al (US ‘722), to measure the diameter of the crystal.
Referring to claim 8, see remarks above regarding claim 3.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2003/0116729 teaches measurement spot 31 performs measurement which is equivalent to a case that an image is formed on a spot 31' on a virtual image 16' of the heat shield 16 with the melt surface 3 determined as a symmetry plane, so that the range-finding unit 8 measures a distance 21 to the melt surface 3 and a distance 21' from the melt surface 3 to the back of the lower end of the heat shield 16 in addition to the distance to the back of the lower end of the heat shield 16 ([0037]-[0040]; Fig 1-3).
JP 2013216505 teaches a liquid level position of a silicon melt is calculated from an interval between a real image and a mirror image determined by imaging the real image including at least a circular opening 17a of a heat shielding member 17 and controlling an interval Δt between the heat shielding member and the liquid level position (abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW J SONG whose telephone number is (571)272-1468. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM-6PM.
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.
MATTHEW J. SONG
Examiner
Art Unit 1714
/MATTHEW J SONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1714
Prosecution Insights