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 Objections
Claims 1, 7, 13, 19, 22 and 26 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 8, “the substrate” should read --a substrate--.
In claim 1, line 9, “the mist” should read --the mist conveyed by the carrier gas-- for clarity.
In claim 1, line 12, “the mist” should read --the mist conveyed by the carrier gas-- for clarity.
In claim 7, line 2, “on the substrate holder side” should read --on sides of the substrate holder--.
In claim 13, line 3, “a mist” should read --the mist--. Support can be found at least in line 2 of the claim.
In claim 13, line 5, “a film” should read --the film--. Support can be found at least in lines 1-2 of the claim.
In claim 19, line 3, “on the substrate holder side” should read --on sides of the substrate holder--.
In claim 22, lines 1-2, “the carrier gas” should read --a carrier gas--.
In claim 26, line 2, “a substrate with a surface to be processed having an area of 50 cm² or more or a diameter of 4 inches (100 mm) or more” should read -- a substrate layer (or film) with a surface to be processed having an area of 50 cm² or more or a diameter of 4 inches (100 mm) or more-- to be distinguished from the substrate aforementioned in the base claim 13.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 of this title, 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, 3-6, 9, 11-13, 15-18, 21 and 24-26 are rejected are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watabe JP 6925548 (Watabe US 2023/0257880 (Watabe ‘880), equivalent to the JP document, as an English translation, is used in rejection) in view of Watabe et al. JP 2020098846 (Watabe et al. US 2022/0223406 (Watabe ‘406), equivalent to the JP document, as an English translation, is used in rejection).
Regarding claim 1, Watabe ‘880 teaches a film forming apparatus (e.g., 101, Figs. 1-3, [41]); comprising:
a mist-forming unit (e.g., 120, Figs. 1-2, [42]-[43]) configured to generate a mist from a raw material solution;
a carrier gas supplier (e.g., carrier gas supplier including 130 and 109, Fig. 1, [48]-[49]) configured to supply a carrier gas that conveys the mist generated by the mist-forming unit; and
a film forming unit (e.g., film forming unit including 300, Fig. 1, Fig. 3; [50]-[75]) configured to heat the mist conveyed by the carrier gas to form a film (e.g., [69]), wherein
the film forming unit includes
a substrate holder (e.g., all of the bottom section of 300, Fig. 3, [41]) configured to hold the substrate (e.g., 310, Fig. 3, [41]),
a nozzle (e.g., 301, Fig. 3, [41], [50]) located above the substrate holder and configured to supply the mist onto the substrate,
a ceiling plate (e.g., 321, Fig. 3, [50]) located above the substrate holder and configured to regulate a flow of the mist supplied from the nozzle (e.g., [50]), and
sidewalls (e.g., sidewalls of 300, Fig. 3) facing each other with the substrate holder interposed, and
when a difference in height position between a substrate holding surface (e.g., substrate holding surface of the substrate holder (discussed above), on which 310 is disposed, Fig. 3) of the substrate holder and a bottom surface of the ceiling plate is I [cm] (e.g., the difference being I [cm], Fig. 3) and a shortest distance between a substrate holding region (e.g., entire region of the substrate holder (discussed above), Fig. 3) of the substrate holder and each of the sidewalls is J [cm] (e.g., the shortest distance being 0 [cm], Fig. 3), IJ≤15 holds (e.g., IJ=0, which pertains to the claimed range).
Watabe ‘880 does not explicitly teach an atomizer configured to atomize a raw material solution to generate a mist; and a carrier gas supplier configured to supply a carrier gas that conveys the mist generated by the atomizer.
It has been well known in the art that a raw material solution is atomized to generate a mist by using a ultrasonic vibrator activated by an oscillator and a mist generation source receiving a ultrasonic wave propagated from the ultrasonic vibrator, as suggested by Watabe ‘406 (e.g., [42], [43]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the mist-forming unit of Watabe ‘880 having similar components/configurations/functions to the claimed atomizer may be an atomizer configured to atomize a raw material solution to generate a mist for example. In this case, Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406, thus, teaches a carrier gas supplier configured to supply a carrier gas that conveys the mist generated by the atomizer.
Regarding claim 3, Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 teaches the film forming apparatus according to claim 1 as discussed above.
Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 does not explicitly teach wherein the I [cm] is 0.15 cm or more and 6.05 cm or less.
Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406, however, recognizes that the gap 323 included to the difference I [cm] is in a range of 0.5 to 10 mm (e.g., Watabe ‘880, [53]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to control and optimize the apparatus of Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 to have the claimed range since it has been held that where the criticality of the claimed range is not shown and the general and/or close conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05.
Regarding claim 4, Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 teaches the film forming apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the J [cm] is 0.5 cm or less (e.g., Watabe ‘880; J [cm] is zero, which pertains to the claimed range).
Regarding claim 5, Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 teaches the film forming apparatus according to claim 1, wherein when the bottom surface of the ceiling plate has an area of B [cm2], B≥40 (e.g., Watabe ‘880; B [cm2] of the bottom surface of the ceiling plate 321 is about 113 [cm2], which is calculated by using a diameter of 120 mm of the ceiling plate 321 and pertains to the claimed range; [88]) holds.
Regarding claim 6, Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 teaches the film forming apparatus according to claim 1, wherein when a surface to be processed of the substrate has an area of A [cm2] (e.g., Watabe ‘880; A [cm2] of a surface to be processed of the substrate 310 is 1 [cm2] or more, which is calculated by using an area of 100 mm2 of the surface of the substrate 310; [62]) and the bottom surface of the ceiling plate has an area of B [cm2] (e.g., Watabe ‘880; B [cm2] of the bottom surface of the ceiling plate 321 is about 113 [cm2], which is calculated by using a diameter of 120 mm of the ceiling plate 321; [88]), B/A≥0.5 (e.g., B/A=113, which pertains to the claimed range) holds.
Regarding claim 9, Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 teaches the film forming apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising an exhaust unit (e.g., 312, Fig. 3) configured to discharge an exhaust gas from the film forming unit.
Regarding claim 11, Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 teaches the film forming apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the film forming unit includes a film forming chamber, and the sidewalls are walls of the film forming chamber (e.g., Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 12, Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 teaches the film forming apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the film forming unit further includes a film forming chamber (e.g., 300, Fig. 3) configured to accommodate the substrate holder, the nozzle, the ceiling plate, and the sidewalls inside (e.g., Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 13, Watabe ‘880 teaches a film forming method in which a film is formed on a substrate by heating a mist of a raw material solution (e.g., Figs. 1-3, [41]-[75], [86]-[94]), the film forming method comprising:
a mist generating step of generating a mist from the raw material solution by using a mist-forming unit (e.g., [65]; [42]-[43]);
a mist conveying step of conveying the mist (e.g., [49]) to a film forming unit (e.g., [66]-[67]);
a film forming step of forming a film by supplying the mist onto the substrate (e.g., 310, Fig. 3, [41]) placed on a substrate holder (e.g., all of the bottom section of 300, Fig. 3, [41]) in the film forming unit from a nozzle (e.g., 312, Fig. 3, [50]), located above the substrate holder, and heating the mist (e.g., [68]-[71]), wherein
in the film forming step,
the mist is supplied from the nozzle into a space surrounded by a ceiling plate (e.g., 321, Fig. 3, [50]) provided above the substrate holder (e.g., all of the bottom section of 300, Fig. 3, [41]) and by sidewalls (e.g., sidewalls of 300, Fig. 3) facing each other with the substrate holder interposed, wherein a difference in height position between a substrate holding surface (e.g., substrate holding surface of the substrate holder (discussed above), on which 310 is disposed, Fig. 3) of the substrate holder and a bottom surface of the ceiling plate is I [cm] (e.g., the difference being I [cm], Fig. 3), and a shortest distance between a substrate holding region (e.g., entire region of the substrate holder (discussed above), Fig. 3) of the substrate holder and each of the sidewalls is J [cm] (e.g., the shortest distance being 0 [cm], Fig. 3), wherein the ceiling plate and the sidewalls are provided such that IJ≤15 (e.g., IJ=0, which pertains to the claimed range) holds.
Watabe ‘880 does not explicitly teach a mist generating step of atomizing the raw material solution to generate a mist.
It has been well known in the art that a raw material solution is atomized to generate a mist by using an ultrasonic vibrator activated by an oscillator and a mist generation source receiving an ultrasonic wave propagated from the ultrasonic vibrator, as suggested by Watabe ‘406 (e.g., [42], [43]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the mist generating step of Watabe ‘880 may include atomizing the raw material solution to generate a mist because the mist generating step of Watabe ‘880 is performed by the mist-forming unit having similar components/configurations/functions to the atomizer of Watabe ‘406 for example.
Regarding claim 15, Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 teaches the film forming method according to claim 13 as discussed above.
Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 does not explicitly teach wherein the ceiling plate is provided such that the difference I [cm] in height position between the substrate holding surface of the substrate holder and the bottom surface of the ceiling plate is 0.15 cm or more and 6.05 cm or less.
Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406, however, recognizes that the gap 323 included to the difference I [cm] is in a range of 0.5 to 10 mm (e.g., Watabe ‘880, [53]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to control and optimize the apparatus of Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 to have the claimed range since it has been held that where the criticality of the claimed range is not shown and the general and/or close conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05.
Regarding claim 16, Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 teaches the film forming method according to claim 13, wherein the sidewalls are provided such that the J [cm] is 5.0 cm or less (e.g., Watabe ‘880; J [cm] is zero, which pertains to the claimed range).
Regarding claim 17, Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 teaches the film forming method according to claim 13, wherein the ceiling plate is provided such that when the bottom surface of the ceiling plate has an area of B [cm2], B≥40 (e.g., Watabe ‘880; B [cm2] of the bottom surface of the ceiling plate 321 is about 113 [cm2], which is calculated by using a diameter of 120 mm of the ceiling plate 321 and pertains to the claimed range; [88]) holds.
Regarding claim 18, Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 teaches the film forming method according to claim 13, wherein the ceiling plate is provided such that when a surface to be processed of the substrate has an area of A [cm²] (e.g., Watabe ‘880; A [cm2] of a surface to be processed of the substrate 310 is 1 [cm2] or more, which is calculated by using an area of 100 mm2 of the surface of the substrate 310; [62]) and the bottom surface of the ceiling plate has an area of B [cm²] (e.g., Watabe ‘880; B [cm2] of the bottom surface of the ceiling plate 321 is about 113 [cm2], which is calculated by using a diameter of 120 mm of the ceiling plate 321; [88]), B/A≥0.5 (e.g., B/A=113, which pertains to the claimed range) holds.
Regarding claim 21, Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 teaches the film forming method according to claim 13, further comprising an exhaust step of discharging an exhaust gas from the film forming unit (e.g., Watabe ‘880, [72]).
Regarding claim 24, Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 teaches the film forming method according to claim 13, wherein a solution containing gallium is used as the raw material solution (e.g., Watabe ‘880, [44]).
Regarding claim 25, Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 teaches the film forming method according to claim 13, wherein a solution containing halogen is used as the raw material solution (e.g., Watabe ‘880, [45]).
Regarding claim 26, Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 teaches the film forming method according to claim 13 as discussed above.
Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 does not explicitly teach wherein a substrate with a surface to be processed having an area of 50 cm² or more or a diameter of 4 inches (100 mm) or more is used as the substrate.
Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406, however, recognizes a substrate 310 with a surface to be processed may have a diameter of 2 inches (50 mm) or more, which overlaps the claimed range. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to control and optimize the method of Watabe ‘880 in view of Watabe ‘406 to have the claimed range since it has been held that where the criticality of the claimed range is not shown and the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP §2144.05.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 7, 8 and 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 and if amended to overcome the claim objection above.
Claims 14, 19, 20, 22 and 23 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 and if amended to overcome the claim objection above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bo Bin Jang whose telephone number is (571) 270-0271. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM 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, Eva Montalvo can be reached at (571) 270-3829. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. 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.
/BO B JANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818 June 6, 2026
Prosecution Insights