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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 08/10/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
The Amendment filed 08/10/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are currently pending in the application. Claims 1, 11, 13, and 18-19 have been amended. No new claims have been added.
Response to Arguments
35 USC 103. Applicant's remarks regarding the rejection of claims 1, 13, and 18 under 35 USC 103 as being obvious over prior art of record are moot as they rely upon amended claim limitations not previously considered. The rejection of amended claims 1-20 is provided below.
Claim Interpretation
Functional language is often associated with a "controller" in the claims (see instant claims 14 and 19-20). The specific language associated with the "controller" will determine what subject matter must be given patentable weight.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 13-17 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “wherein the plurality of optical systems” in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because there is no earlier recitation of the limitation. MPEP 2173.05(e). For compact prosecution, the limitation has been examined as if it read -- wherein the optical system of each of the plurality of laser heads--. Claims 14-17 which depend from claim 13 are similarly rejected.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-3 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamura (US 7968432 B2 - of record, citing US 2007/0202619 A1 as equivalent).
Regarding claim 1, Tamura teaches a laser processing apparatus 20 (an apparatus for dicing a wafer) comprising a fixed laser radiation apparatus 22 in a first embodiment configured to scan laser beams L1 a through L1 c., wherein tables 31 and 32 may move in a direction orthogonal to the radiation direction of laser beams L1 a through L1 c, and wherein the tables 31 and 32 move wafer 10 (a stage configured to receive a wafer, and move the wafer in a first direction; and a plurality of laser heads above the stage along the first direction) (Fig 11-14 and ¶0171-0204).
Tamura teaches that laser heads HLa through HLc are provided in the laser radiation apparatus 22 in a second embodiment, wherein each laser head is shifted in the X direction at least by its width (a plurality of laser heads being spaced apart from each other along each of the first direction and a second direction perpendicular to the first direction, and being positioned above the stage in a third direction perpendicular to the first direction and the second direction) (Fig 21A-21B and ¶0236-0237).
Tamura teaches a laser radiation apparatus 22 in a first embodiment and a laser radiation apparatus 22 in a second embodiment (substituted components and their functions were known in the art; see MPEP 2143(B)).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify apparatus disclosed in Tamura by substituting the laser radiation apparatus in the first embodiment with the laser radiation apparatus in the second embodiment such that the plurality of laser heads are configured to, based on the stage moving the wafer in the first direction, emit a plurality of laser beams onto the wafer along a plurality of cutting lines, the plurality of cutting lines extending in the first direction and each cutting line spaced apart from other cutting lines in [[a]] the second direction, the second direction perpendicular to the first direction, since the simple substitution of one known element for another would obtain predictable results. MPEP 2143(B).
Regarding claim 2, as applied to claim 1, the limitation “wherein a distance in the second direction between optical axes of each of the plurality of laser heads is equal to a distance between each of the plurality of cutting lines.” Here, Tamura teaches an apparatus which includes all the structural limitations of the claims.
Regarding claim 3, as applied to claim 1, Tamura teaches an apparatus further comprising a plurality of laser beam emitters configured to output the plurality of laser beams (Fig 11-14, 21A-21B and ¶0171-0204,0236-0237).
Regarding claim 11, as applied to claim 1, Tamura teaches an apparatus further comprising wherein the stage is further configured to rotate the wafer by 90 degrees; and after the stage rotates the wafer by 90 degrees and the stage moves the wafer in the first direction, each of the plurality of laser heads are further configured to emit a respective laser beam of the plurality of laser beams into the wafer along a respective secondary cutting line of a plurality of secondary cutting lines, each of the plurality of secondary cutting lines extending in the second direction, and each of the plurality of secondary cutting lines being different from each other (Fig 11-14 and ¶0171-0204).
Claims 4-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamura (US 7968432 B2 - of record, citing US 2007/0202619 A1 as equivalent), as applied to claim 1, and in further view of Hong (US 2003/0006221 A1 – of record).
Regarding claim 4, as applied to claim 1, Tamura does not teach an apparatus further comprising a plurality of laser beam modulators each disposed between a corresponding laser beam emitter of the plurality of laser beam emitters and a corresponding laser head of the plurality of laser heads.
However, in the same field of endeavor, apparatus for cutting a substrate using laser irradiation, Hong teaches an apparatus comprising a plurality of laser beam modulators each disposed between a corresponding laser beam emitter of the plurality of laser beam emitters and a corresponding laser head of the plurality of laser heads (Fig 3-5 and ¶0027-0037).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus disclosed in Tamura by including the a plurality of laser beam modulators each disposed between a corresponding laser beam emitter of the plurality of laser beam emitters and a corresponding laser head of the plurality of laser heads as disclosed in Hong, since the combination of familiar elements is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(A).
Regarding claims 5-6, as applied to claim 1, Tamura teaches an apparatus further comprising a laser beam emitter configured to output a laser beam (Fig 11-14 and ¶0171-0204) but is silent as to a beam splitter configured to split the laser beam into the plurality of laser beams and a laser beam modulator disposed between the laser beam emitter and the beam splitter.
However, in the same field of endeavor, apparatus for cutting a substrate using laser irradiation, Hong teaches an apparatus comprising a beam splitter configured to split the laser beam into the plurality of laser beams and a laser beam modulator disposed between the laser beam emitter and the beam splitter (Hong, Fig 7-8 and ¶0038-0040).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus disclosed in Tamura by including the beam splitter configured to split the laser beam into the plurality of laser beams and a laser beam modulator disposed between the laser beam emitter and the beam splitter as disclosed in Hong, since the combination of familiar elements is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(A).
Regarding claim 7, as applied to claim 5, although Tamura in view of Hong do not specify an apparatus further comprising a plurality of laser beam modulators disposed between the beam splitter and the plurality of laser heads, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to duplicate the laser beam modulator disposed between the beam splitter and the plurality of laser heads disclosed in Tamura in view of Hong, since it has been held that the mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, and since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B).
Regarding claim 8, as applied to claim 1, Tamura in view of Hong do not specify wherein the plurality of laser heads are configured to emit the plurality of laser beams to a plurality of depths below a first surface of the wafer, each of the plurality of depths being a different depth.
However, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable range by routine experimentation. MPEP 2144.05(II). It would have been routine optimization to arrive at the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success since Tamura teaches that increasing the laser beam wavelength deepens a depth position of the focusing point in the wafer (¶0068).
Since this particular parameter is recognized as result-effective variable, i.e. a variable which achieves a recognized result, the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable can be characterized as routine experimentation. MPEP 2144.05(II).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the apparatus disclosed in Tamura in view of Hong such that via routine optimization such that the plurality of laser heads are configured to emit the plurality of laser beams to a plurality of depths below a first surface of the wafer, each of the plurality of depths being a different depth to yield an expected result. MPEP 2144.05(II).
Regarding claim 9, as applied to claim 1, Tamura does not specify wherein each of the plurality of laser heads further includes a beam splitter configured to split a corresponding laser beam of the plurality of laser beams into a first split laser beam and a second split laser beam.
However, in the same field of endeavor, apparatus for cutting a substrate using laser irradiation, Hong teaches an apparatus comprising a beam splitter configured to split a corresponding laser beam of the plurality of laser beams into a first split laser beam and a second split laser beam (Fig 7-8 and ¶0038-0040).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus disclosed in Tamura by including the a beam splitter configured to split a corresponding laser beam of the plurality of laser beams into a first split laser beam and a second split laser beam as disclosed in Hong, since the combination of familiar elements is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(A).
Tamura in view of Hong do not specify wherein as the stage moves the wafer in the first direction, each of the plurality of laser heads are configured to transmit the first split laser beam and the second split laser beam into the wafer along different cutting lines of the plurality of cutting lines.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify apparatus disclosed in Tamura in view of Hong such that as the stage moves the wafer in the first direction, each of the plurality of laser heads are configured to transmit the first split laser beam and the second split laser beam into the wafer along different cutting lines of the plurality of cutting lines with predictable results in order to attain satisfactory cutting speeds at lower cost (Hong, ¶0040).
Regarding claim 10, as applied to claim 9, Tamura in view of Hong do not specify wherein each of the plurality of laser heads are configured to transmit the first split laser beam to a first depth from a first surface of the wafer and transmit the second split laser beam to a second depth from the first surface of the wafer, wherein the second depth is different from the first depth.
However, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable range by routine experimentation. MPEP 2144.05(II). It would have been routine optimization to arrive at the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success since Tamura teaches that increasing the laser beam wavelength deepens a depth position of the focusing point in the wafer (¶0068).
Since this particular parameter is recognized as result-effective variable, i.e. a variable which achieves a recognized result, the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable can be characterized as routine experimentation. MPEP 2144.05(II).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the apparatus disclosed in Tamura in view of Hong such that via routine optimization such that the plurality of laser heads are configured to transmit the first split laser beam to a first depth from a first surface of the wafer and transmit the second split laser beam to a second depth from the first surface of the wafer, wherein the second depth is different from the first depth to yield an expected result. MPEP 2144.05(II).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamura (US 7968432 B2 - of record, citing US 2007/0202619 A1 as equivalent), as applied to claim 1, and in view of Hosseini (US 2015/0038313 A1 - of record).
Regarding claim 12, as applied to claim 1, Tamura does not disclose an apparatus wherein each of the plurality of laser heads include a height sensor configured to generate height data based on a height from a first surface of the wafer to a respective laser head of the plurality of laser heads and a camera configured to generate image data based on an image of the wafer.
However, in the same field of endeavor, dicing wafers, Hosseini teaches the known technique of optical scanning of a beam or a light source across the work piece, where the reflected light is interrogated to measure the distance between the work and the camera; for example, such an embodiment could be implemented as a confocal system; a confocal or similar fast auto focus mechanism may be sufficient to provide accurate street location and die corner edge location relative to LED wafer notch or flat; wherein the z position would be selected to coincide with the desired focus position, plus or minus the wafer curvature offset, as a function of XY and theta positions; wherein the pre-mapped data could then be loaded into the system control computer, and used to drive the real-time auto-focus system in Z with a servo coordinated signal; and wherein such a system could enable autofocus control of approximately +/−50 nm in the position of the geometric focus relative to the surface of the part or stage, while translating the sample relative to the optical beam at high linear speeds (such as up to 1.5 m/s) (a height sensor configured to generate height data based on a height from a first surface of the wafer to a respective laser head of the plurality of laser heads and a camera configured to generate image data based on an image of the wafer) (¶0219-0220).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the apparatus disclosed in Tamura by applying the known technique of a height sensor configured to generate height data based on a height from a first surface of the wafer to a respective laser head of the plurality of laser heads and a camera configured to generate image data based on an image of the wafer disclosed in Hosseini to each of the plurality of laser heads disclosed in Tamura with predictable results and resulting in an improved apparatus. MPEP 2143(D).
Claims 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamura (US 7968432 B2 - of record, citing US 2007/0202619 A1 as equivalent) in view of Hosseini (US 2015/0038313 A1 - of record).
Regarding claim 13, Tamura teaches a laser processing apparatus 20 (an apparatus for dicing a wafer) comprising a fixed laser radiation apparatus 22 in a first embodiment configured to scan laser beams L1 a through L1 c., wherein tables 31 and 32 may move in a direction orthogonal to the radiation direction of laser beams L1 a through L1 c, and wherein the tables 31 and 32 move wafer 10 (a stage configured to receive a wafer, and move the wafer in a first direction; and a plurality of laser heads; plurality of laser heads include an optical system) (Fig 11-14 and ¶0171-0204).
Tamura teaches that laser heads HLa through HLc are provided in the laser radiation apparatus 22 in a second embodiment, wherein each laser head is shifted in the X direction at least by its width (a plurality of laser heads spaced apart from each other along each of the first direction and a second direction perpendicular to the first direction, and positioned above the stage in a third direction perpendicular to the first direction and the second direction) (Fig 21A-21B and ¶0236-0237).
Tamura teaches a laser radiation apparatus 22 in a first embodiment and a laser radiation apparatus 22 in a second embodiment (substituted components and their functions were known in the art; see MPEP 2143(B)), one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify apparatus disclosed in Tamura by substituting the laser radiation apparatus in the first embodiment with the laser radiation apparatus in the second embodiment such that the plurality of laser heads are configured to, based on the stage moving the wafer in the first direction, emit a plurality of laser beams onto the wafer along a plurality of cutting lines, the plurality of cutting lines extending in the first direction and each cutting line spaced apart from other cutting lines in the second direction, the second direction perpendicular to the first direction, since the simple substitution of one known element for another would obtain predictable results. MPEP 2143(B).
Tamura does not disclose an apparatus wherein each of the plurality of laser heads include a height sensor configured to generate height data based on a height from a first surface of the wafer to a respective laser head of the plurality of laser heads and a camera configured to generate image data based on an image of the wafer.
However, in the same field of endeavor, dicing wafers, Hosseini teaches the known technique of optical scanning of a beam or a light source across the work piece, where the reflected light is interrogated to measure the distance between the work and the camera; for example, such an embodiment could be implemented as a confocal system; a confocal or similar fast auto focus mechanism may be sufficient to provide accurate street location and die corner edge location relative to LED wafer notch or flat; wherein the z position would be selected to coincide with the desired focus position, plus or minus the wafer curvature offset, as a function of XY and theta positions; wherein the pre-mapped data could then be loaded into the system control computer, and used to drive the real-time auto-focus system in Z with a servo coordinated signal; and wherein such a system could enable autofocus control of approximately +/−50 nm in the position of the geometric focus relative to the surface of the part or stage, while translating the sample relative to the optical beam at high linear speeds (such as up to 1.5 m/s) (a height sensor configured to generate height data based on a height from a first surface of the wafer to a respective laser head of the plurality of laser heads and a camera configured to generate image data based on an image of the wafer) (¶0219-0220).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the apparatus disclosed in Tamura by applying the known technique of a height sensor configured to generate height data based on a height from a first surface of the wafer to a respective laser head of the plurality of laser heads and a camera configured to generate image data based on an image of the wafer disclosed in Hosseini to each of the plurality of laser heads disclosed in Tamura such that the plurality of optical systems are configured to, based on the stage moving the wafer in the first direction, emit a plurality of laser beams into the wafer along a plurality of cutting lines, each of the plurality of cutting lines extending in the first direction and spaced apart from each other in the second direction with predictable results and resulting in an improved apparatus. MPEP 2143(D).
Regarding claim 14, as applied to claim 13, Tamura in view of Hosseini teach the known technique of an apparatus comprising a controller configured to adjust a distance between the wafer and the plurality of laser heads and align the wafer and each of the plurality of laser heads (Tamura, Fig 11 and ¶0171-0174).
Tamura in view of Hosseini does not specify an apparatus further comprising at least one controller configured to adjust a distance between the wafer and the plurality of laser heads based on respective height data corresponding to each of the plurality of laser heads, and align the wafer and each of the plurality of laser heads based on the plurality of image data.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the apparatus disclosed in Tamura in view of Hosseini by applying the known technique of an apparatus comprising a controller configured to adjust a distance between the wafer and the plurality of laser heads and align the wafer and each of the plurality of laser heads disclosed in Tamura and the known technique of height sensor configured to generate height data based on a height from a first surface of the wafer to a respective laser head of the plurality of laser heads and a camera configured to generate image data based on an image of the wafer as disclosed in Hosseini to the apparatus disclosed in Tamura in view of Hosseini such that the controller is configured to move at least one of the plurality of laser heads and the stage based on height data and image data with predictable results and resulting in an improved apparatus. MPEP 2143(D).
Regarding claim 15, as applied to claim 13, the limitations “wherein a distance in the second direction between optical axes of each of the plurality of laser heads is equal to a distance between each of the plurality of cutting lines” is a recitation of intended use of the claimed plurality of laser heads. A claim containing a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. MPEP 2114(II). Here, Tamura in view of Hosseini teaches an apparatus which includes all the structural limitations of the claim.
Regarding claim 16, as applied to claim 13, Tamura in view of Hosseini teach an apparatus further comprising a plurality of laser beam emitters configured to output the plurality of laser beams (Tamura, Fig 11-14 and ¶0171-0204).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamura (US 7968432 B2 - of record, citing US 2007/0202619 A1 as equivalent) in view of Hosseini (US 2015/0038313 A1 - of record), as applied to claim 13, and in further view of Hong (US 2003/0006221 A1 – of record).
Regarding claim 17, as applied to claim 13, Tamura in view of Hosseini teach an apparatus further comprising a laser beam emitter configured to output a laser beam (Tamura, Fig 11-14 and ¶0171-0204) but is silent as to a beam splitter configured to split the laser beam into the plurality of laser beams.
However, in the same field of endeavor, apparatus for cutting a substrate using laser irradiation, Hong teaches an apparatus comprising a beam splitter configured to split the laser beam into the plurality of laser beams (Hong, Fig 7-8 and ¶0038-0040).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus disclosed in Tamura in view of Hosseini by including the beam splitter configured to split the laser beam into the plurality of laser beams as disclosed in Hong, since the combination of familiar elements is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(A).
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamura (US 7968432 B2 - of record, citing US 2007/0202619 A1 as equivalent) in view of Hosseini (US 2015/0038313 A1 - of record).
Regarding claim 18, Tamura teaches a laser processing apparatus 20 (an apparatus for dicing a wafer) comprising a fixed laser radiation apparatus 22 in a first embodiment configured to scan laser beams L1 a through L1 c., wherein tables 31 and 32 may move in a direction orthogonal to the radiation direction of laser beams L1 a through L1 c, and wherein the tables 31 and 32 move wafer 10 (a stage configured to receive a wafer, and move the wafer in a first direction; and a plurality of laser heads; a plurality of laser heads include an optical system) (Fig 11-14 and ¶0171-0204).
Tamura teaches that laser heads HLa through HLc are provided in the laser radiation apparatus 22 in a second embodiment, wherein each laser head is shifted in the X direction at least by its width (a plurality of laser heads spaced apart from each other along each of the first direction and a second direction perpendicular to the first direction, and positioned above the stage in a third direction perpendicular to the first direction and the second direction; wherein a plurality of optical axes corresponding to the plurality of laser heads respectively encounter different cutting lines among the plurality of cutting lines) (Fig 21A-21B and ¶0236-0237).
Tamura teaches a laser radiation apparatus 22 in a first embodiment and a laser radiation apparatus 22 in a second embodiment (substituted components and their functions were known in the art; see MPEP 2143(B)), one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify apparatus disclosed in Tamura by substituting the laser radiation apparatus in the first embodiment with the laser radiation apparatus in the second embodiment such that the plurality of laser heads are configured to, based on the stage moving the wafer in the first direction, emit a plurality of laser beams onto the wafer along a plurality of cutting lines, the plurality of cutting lines extending in the first direction and each cutting line spaced apart from other cutting lines in the second direction, the second direction perpendicular to the first direction, since the simple substitution of one known element for another would obtain predictable results. MPEP 2143(B).
Tamura does not disclose an apparatus wherein each of the plurality of laser heads include a height sensor configured to generate height data based on a height from a first surface of the wafer to a respective laser head of the plurality of laser heads and a camera configured to generate image data based on an image of the wafer.
However, in the same field of endeavor, dicing wafers, Hosseini teaches the known technique of optical scanning of a beam or a light source across the work piece, where the reflected light is interrogated to measure the distance between the work and the camera; for example, such an embodiment could be implemented as a confocal system; a confocal or similar fast auto focus mechanism may be sufficient to provide accurate street location and die corner edge location relative to LED wafer notch or flat; wherein the z position would be selected to coincide with the desired focus position, plus or minus the wafer curvature offset, as a function of XY and theta positions; wherein the pre-mapped data could then be loaded into the system control computer, and used to drive the real-time auto-focus system in Z with a servo coordinated signal; and wherein such a system could enable autofocus control of approximately +/−50 nm in the position of the geometric focus relative to the surface of the part or stage, while translating the sample relative to the optical beam at high linear speeds (such as up to 1.5 m/s) (a height sensor configured to generate height data based on a height from a first surface of the wafer to a respective laser head of the plurality of laser heads and a camera configured to generate image data based on an image of the wafer) (¶0219-0220).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the apparatus disclosed in Tamura by applying the known technique of a height sensor configured to generate height data based on a height from a first surface of the wafer to a respective laser head of the plurality of laser heads and a camera configured to generate image data based on an image of the wafer disclosed in Hosseini to each of the plurality of laser heads disclosed in Tamura such that the optical system of each of the plurality of laser heads is configured to, based on the stage moving the wafer in the first direction, emit a plurality of laser beams into the wafer along a plurality of cutting lines, each of the plurality of cutting lines extending in the first direction and spaced apart from each other in the second direction with predictable results and resulting in an improved apparatus. MPEP 2143(D).
Regarding claims 19-20, as applied to claim 18, Tamura in view of Hosseini do not explicitly teach a controller configured to move at least one of the plurality of laser heads and the stage in the third direction based on the height data nor a controller configured to move at least one of the plurality of laser heads and the stage in at least one of the first direction and the second direction based on the image data.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the apparatus disclosed in Tamura in view of Hosseini by applying the known technique of an apparatus comprising a controller configured to adjust a distance between the wafer and the plurality of laser heads and align the wafer and each of the plurality of laser heads disclosed in Tamura and the known technique of height sensor configured to generate height data based on a height from a first surface of the wafer to a respective laser head of the plurality of laser heads and a camera configured to generate image data based on an image of the wafer as disclosed in Hosseini to the apparatus disclosed in Tamura in view of Hosseini such that the controller is configured to move at least one of the plurality of laser heads and the stage based on height data and image data with predictable results and resulting in an improved apparatus. MPEP 2143(D).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JaMel M Nelson whose telephone number is (571)272-8174. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 AM ET - 5:00 PM ET.
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, Galen Hauth can be reached on (571) 270-5516. 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.
/JAMEL M NELSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1743
Prosecution Insights