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 .
Priority
1. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 4/18/2024 and 4/23/2024 were filed prior to the mailing date of this action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
3. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following features must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
Claim 11, “a cut part formed by being cut inwardly from an outer circumferential surface”
Claim 12, “the cut part is formed at a position communicating with the through hole”
No new matter should be entered.
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 Objections
4. Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 6, “a ring shape” should read “[[a]] the ring shape” to avoid the antecedent basis issue.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
5. 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 11-13 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 11 and 12, the language recites “the cut part formed by being cut inwardly from an outer circumferential surface” … “the cut part is formed at a position communicating with the through hole”. However, it is not precisely clear how the cut part 213 of instant fig. 3 is “cut inwardly from an outer circumferential surface” or how the cut part 213 of instant fig. 3 is “formed at a position communicating with the through hole”. Specifically, the cut part 213 of fig. 3 is not cut inwardly from an outer circumferential surface or formed to communicate with the through hole. It is not clear if the numbers 213 and 214 were mixed. Overall, in view of the above drawing objections, it is not precisely clear what is required of the claimed “cut part”. For purposes of examination, as best understood by the examiner, the language will be interpreted as requiring a cut part that extends inwardly and is adjacent to the through hole.
Claim 13 is rejected for depending upon a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
Claims 1-10 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (KR 20110097357), hereinafter Lee.
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches a retainer ring (fig. 2 and 8) comprising:
a core part (insert ring member 20) formed in a ring shape (see annotated fig. 3 below) and comprising a metal material (paragraph 0046 of the attached translation); and
PNG
media_image1.png
454
604
media_image1.png
Greyscale
an injection part (cover member 10, fig. 8, paragraph 0071 of the attached translation) formed around the core part (fig. 8-9) through molding (fig. 2 and 6, mold 40) to surround the core part (fig. 8-9),
wherein the core part comprises:
a core main body formed in a ring shape (fig. 3); and
at least one through hole formed through the core main body (figs. 3, through holes 22a).
Regarding claim 2, Lee teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Lee teaches wherein the injection part comprises:
an injection body having a slot in a shape corresponding to the core part in the injection body such that the core part is positioned in the injection body (as seen in figs. 8-10); and
a pillar part formed in a shape corresponding to the through hole while being inserted into the through hole (fig. 7, pillar part of cover member 10 located below groove 10a corresponding to the through hole 22a).
Regarding claim 3, Lee teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 2. Additionally, Lee teaches wherein the injection body comprises:
an upper injection body positioned on an upper side of the core part (fig. 7, part of cover member 10 positioned on upper side of core part 20); and
a lower injection body positioned on a lower side of the core part (fig. 7, part of cover member 10 positioned on lower side of core part 20).
Regarding claim 4, Lee teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 3. Additionally, Lee teaches wherein the pillar part connects the upper injection body to the lower injection body (fig. 7, wherein the interpreted pillar part of the cover member 10 connects the upper injection body to the lower injection body).
Regarding claim 5, Lee teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 3. Additionally, Lee teaches wherein the injection body further comprises:
an inner injection body positioned on an inner side of the core part (fig. 9, wherein fig. 9 is a sectional view taken along the line B-B’ in fig. 8 [0036 of attached translation], wherein the right side of fig. 9 is the inner side of the ring in view of the arrows of fig. 8, wherein the part of cover 10 positioned on the right side is interpreted as the inner injection body positioned on an inner side of the core part); and
an outer injection body positioned on an outer side of the core part (fig. 9, wherein fig. 9 is a sectional view taken along the line B-B’ in fig. 8 [0036 of attached translation], wherein the left side of fig. 9 is the outer side of the ring in view of the arrows of fig. 8, wherein the part of cover 10 positioned on the left side is interpreted as the outer injection body positioned on an outer side of the core part).
Regarding claim 6, Lee teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 5. Additionally, Lee teaches wherein the inner injection body is formed to be stepped (right side of cover 10 in fig. 9 is stepped) such that a lower portion protrudes further inwardly than an upper portion (a lower portion on the right side of cover 10 in fig. 9 protrudes further inwardly than an upper portion of the right side of cover 10 in fig. 9).
Regarding claim 7, Lee teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 6. Additionally, Lee teaches wherein a stepped surface of the inner injection body is formed to be inclined downward and inwardly (right side of cover 10 in fig. 9 includes a stepped inclined surface that is formed to be inclined downward and inwardly).
Regarding claim 8, Lee teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 5. Additionally, Lee teaches wherein the outer injection body is formed to be stepped such that an upper portion protrudes further outwardly than a lower portion (left side in fig. 9, wherein the left side of cover 10 in fig. 9 is formed to be stepped such that an upper portion protrudes further outwardly than a lower portion).
Regarding claim 9, Lee teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Lee teaches wherein an outer circumferential surface of the core main body comprises:
a first outer circumferential surface (fig. 9, wherein the left side of cover 10 in fig. 9 includes a first outer circumferential surface that is near the top); and
a second outer circumferential surface (fig. 9, wherein the left side of cover 10 in fig. 9 includes a second outer circumferential surface that is near the bottom) positioned relatively lower than the first outer circumferential surface (fig. 9) and positioned to be recessed relatively inwardly compared to the first outer circumferential surface (fig. 9, the lower surface on the left side of cover 10 in fig. 9 is recessed relatively inwardly compared to the upper surface on the left side of cover 10 in fig. 9).
Regarding claim 10, Lee teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Lee teaches wherein the through hole is formed in plurality and disposed to be spaced apart from another in a circumferential direction of the core main body (fig. 3, through holes 22a are disposed in plurality and disposed to be spaced apart from another in a circumferential direction of the core main body).
Regarding claim 14, Lee teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Lee teaches wherein the injection part comprises an engineering plastic material (paragraph 0072 of attached translation).
Regarding claim 15, Lee teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Lee teaches wherein the core part further comprises a tab hole to connect the retainer ring to a carrier head (fig. 7, ring mounting groove 10a is interpreted as a tab hole of the core part 20 to connect the retainer ring to a carrier head, wherein through hole 21a is reinterpreted as the at least one through hole of claim 1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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.
Claims 11-13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR 20110097357), hereinafter Lee, in view of Shin et al. (KR 20200140069), hereinafter Shin.
Regarding claims 11-13, Lee teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Lee does not explicitly teach wherein the core part further comprises a cut part formed by being cut inwardly from an outer circumferential surface of the core main body, wherein the cut part is formed at a position communicating with the through hole, wherein the cut part prevents shape deformation due to a difference in shrinkage rates between the core part and the injection part.
However, Shin teaches a retainer ring for a carrier head wherein the core part further comprises a cut part formed by being cut inwardly from an outer circumferential surface of the core main body (fig. 7, gap space 110b is interpreted as the cut part formed by being cut inwardly from an outer circumferential surface of the core main body), wherein the cut part is formed at a position communicating with the through hole (gap space 110b is adjacent the through hole 118 of fig. 8y. As best understood by the examiner, in view of the above 35 USC 112(b) rejections, the prior art teaches the claimed limitations), wherein the cut part prevents shape deformation due to a difference in shrinkage rates between the core part and the injection part (the gap space 110b is capable of providing wherein the gap space prevents shape deformation due to a difference in shrinkage rates between the core part and the injection part via reducing shear force, which thereby reduces generated heat, which thereby prevents shape deformation due to the reduced generated heat [0050 of Shin]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee to incorporate the teachings of Shin to provide wherein the core part further comprises a cut part formed by being cut inwardly from an outer circumferential surface of the core main body, wherein the cut part is formed at a position communicating with the through hole, wherein the cut part prevents shape deformation due to a difference in shrinkage rates between the core part and the injection part.
Specifically, it would have been obvious to modify the retaining ring of Lee to provide a gap space as incorporated from Shin, wherein the gap space is cut inwardly from an outer circumferential surface of the core main body, wherein the cut part is formed at a position communicating with the through hole, wherein the cut part is capable of preventing deformation due to a difference in shrinkage rates between the core part and the injection part. Doing so would allow the retaining ring to resist the shear force in the circumferential direction of the retaining ring in order to suppress localized deformation [0050 of the attached translation of Shin].
Regarding claim 16, Lee teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Lee does not explicitly teach a substrate polishing apparatus comprising:
the retainer ring; and
a carrier head connected to an upper side of the retainer ring.
However, Shin teaches a retainer ring for a carrier head including a substrate polishing apparatus (fig. 1) comprising:
the retainer ring (fig. 4, retaining ring 100); and
a carrier head (fig. 4, carrier head 20) connected to an upper side of the retainer ring (fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee to incorporate the teachings of Shin to provide a substrate polishing apparatus comprising:
the retainer ring according to claim 1; and
a carrier head connected to an upper side of the retainer ring.
Specifically, it would have been obvious to incorporate the retaining ring of claim 1 as taught by Lee into a carrier head of a substrate polishing apparatus as taught by Shin. Doing so would allow the retaining ring to function as intended and retain a workpiece during processing.
Conclusion
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chen et al. (US PGPUB 20200398399) teaches a retaining ring similar to the claimed invention
Han (US PGPUB 20140123469) teaches a retainer ring similar to the claimed invention
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL A GUMP whose telephone number is (571)272-2172. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 9:00-5:30.
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, David Posigian can be reached at (313) 446-6546. 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.
/MICHAEL A GUMP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights