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 § 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 16-20 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.
Claim 16 recites “cleaning the substrate in the polishing module” in line 8, which is unclear. Should it be cleaning in the cleaning module instead? For examination purposes, it will be interpreted as “cleaning the substrate in the cleaning module”.
Due to their dependency from claim 16, claims 17-20 are also rejected under 112 paragraph b.
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, 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.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toyomura et al. (PG Pub U.S 2019/0115230) and further in view of Davenport (WO1999051398A).
Regarding claim 1, Toyomura teaches a method, comprising: loading a substrate to a CMP tool (fig 1; para 0035 and 0039): performing a first polish on a surface of the substrate in a first polishing station (para 0043; 3A and 3B read on first polish station): transferring the substrate from the first polishing station to a transporter (swing transporter 12 reads on transporter) (para 0050) by unloading the substrate from a first polishing head in the first polishing station (para 0047-0050; 3A reads on first polishing head) and disposing the substrate in the transporter (12) using a transfer robot (linear transporter 6 and 7 along with movable ring mechanism reads on transfer robot) (para 0050); transferring the substrate from the transporter to a second polishing station (3C and 3D read on second polishing station) by picking up the substrate from the transporter and loading the substrate to a second polishing head (3C) in a second polishing station using the transfer robot (para 0050; swing transporter 12 transports substrate to linear transporter 7 which loads onto the second polishing station); performing a second polish on the substrate surface in the second polishing station (para 0045); transferring the substrate from the second polishing station to the transporter by unloading the substrate from the second polishing head in the second polishing station and disposing the substrate in the transporter (0050; after polishing the wafer is unloaded and disposed back on the swing transporter 12 to be transported further to cleaning module); and cleaning the substrate after the second polish in a first cleaning station (para 0050-0052).
Toyomura fails to teach providing a wetting solution to the substrate surface after the first polish of the substrate while the substrate is disposed in the transporter and providing the wetting solution to the substrate surface after the second polish of the substrate while the substrate is disposed in the transporter. However, Davenport also teaches a CMP method (abstract and fig 2) wherein it is known to provide a wetting solution (55b) to the substrate surface (page 9 lines 14-20) after the first polish (25a) of the substrate while the substrate is disposed in the transporter (60) (page 11 line 31 – page 12 line 14) and provide the wetting solution (55c) to the substrate surface (page 9 lines 14-20) after the second polish (25b) of the substrate while the substrate is disposed in the transporter (60) (page 11 line 31 – page 12 line 14) in order to prevent polishing liquid/slurry contamination between polishing stations. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Toyomura by providing a wetting solution to the substrate surface after the first polish of the substrate while the substrate is disposed in the transporter and providing the wetting solution to the substrate surface after the second polish of the substrate while the substrate is disposed in the transporter as taught by Davenport in order to prevent polishing liquid/slurry contamination between polishing stations.
Regarding claim 2, the present combination of Toyomura and Davenport teaches
spraying the substrate with one or more spraying nozzles (55 b,c) (page 9 lines 14-20 of
Davenport).
Regarding claim 3, the present combination of Toyomura and Davenport teaches
the one or more spraying nozzles (55b,c) are stationary (page 9 lines 14-20 of Davenport).
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toyamura et al. (PG Pub U.S 2019/0115230), Davenport (WO1999051398A) and further in view of Tomita et al. (PG Pub U.S 2006/0035797).
Regarding claim 4, the present combination of Toyomura and Davenport fails to teach wherein providing the wetting solution changes hydrophobic areas on the substrate surface to hydrophilic. However, Tomita also teaches a substrate pre-treatment prior to cleaning step wherein providing the wetting solution changes hydrophobic areas on the substrate surface to hydrophilic (para 0216) in order to prevent adsorbing of organic substances (para 0018 and 0064) and achieve excellent removability of particles (para 0095). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the present combination of the present combination of Toyomura and Davenport such that the wetting solution changes hydrophobic areas on the substrate surface to hydrophilic as taught by Tomita in order to prevent adsorbing of organic substances and achieve excellent removability of particles.
Regarding claim 5, the present combination of Toyomura, Davenport, and Tomita teaches wherein the wetting solution comprises deionized water and an additive to make the substrate surface hydrophilic (para 0216 of Tomia).
Claims 16-17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kweon et al. (PG Pub U.S 2017/0323807) and further in view of Hu et al. (PG Pub U.S 2018/0056479).
Regarding claim 16, Kweon teaches a method, comprising: loading a substrate into a CMP (chemical mechanical polishing) tool (figs 2, 30 and 34) (para 0103 and 0105-0107) comprising a polishing module (100) (para 0105), a cleaning module (300) (para 0111), and a transfer module (P1) (para 0110 and 0163; wherein the pre-cleaning module which also transfers the substrate from the polishing module to the cleaning module reads on transfer module); polishing the substrate in the polishing module (para 0104-0105); transferring the substrate from the polishing module (para 0110 and 0271) to the transfer module (para 0270-0271, 0274-0275, and 0277); exposing the substrate on the transfer module to a wetting solution (para 0120-0126 and 0281-0287; by pre-cleaning in the pre-cleaning region P1); cleaning the substrate in the cleaning module (para 0111, 0163-0165 and 0296).
Kweon fails to teach loading the substrate through a factory interface into the CMP tool and unloading the substrate from the CMP tool through the factory interface. However, Hu also teaches a CMP tool wherein it is known to load the substrate through a factory interface into the CMP tool and unload the substrate from the CMP tool through the factory interface (para 0005) in order to easily access and safely transfer the substrate to and from the CMP tool. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Kweon such that it includes loading the substrate through a factory interface into the CMP tool and unloading the substrate from the CMP tool through the factory interface as taught by Hu in order to easily access and safely transfer the substrate to and from the CMP tool.
Regarding claim 17, the present combination of Kweon and Hu teaches transporting the substrate by a conveyor belt (drive assembly 142 reads on conveyor belt) (fig 31; para 0275-0276 of Kweon) disposed between the polishing module and the cleaning module (para 0275-0276 of Kweon; part of the pre-cleaning region P1 thus; disposed between polishing module and cleaning module).
Regarding claim 19, the present combination of Kweon and Hu teaches exposing the substrate to the wetting solution comprises spraying the substrate with the wetting solution using one or more nozzles (para 0120-0126 and 0281-0287 of Kweon).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kweon et al. (PG Pub U.S 2017/0323807), Hu et al. (PG Pub U.S 2018/0056479) and further in view of Tomita et al. (PG Pub U.S 2006/0035797).
Regarding claim 18, the present combination of Kweon and Hu teaches wherein the wetting solution comprises deionized water (para 0137 of Kweon) and one or more additives (para 0137-0139 of Kweon) but fails to specifically teach to make a surface of the substrate hydrophilic. However, Tomita also teaches a substrate pre-treatment prior to cleaning step wherein it is known for the wetting solution to comprise deionized water and an additive to make the substrate surface hydrophilic (para 0216) in order to prevent adsorbing of organic substances (para 0018 and 0064) and achieve excellent removability of particles (para 0095). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the present combination of Kweon and Hu such that the wetting solution comprises deionized water and one or more additives to make a surface of the substrate hydrophilic as taught by Tomita in order to prevent adsorbing of organic substances and achieve excellent removability of particles.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kweon et al. (PG Pub U.S 2017/0323807), Hu et al. (PG Pub U.S 2018/0056479) and further in view of Lu et al. (PG Pub U.S 2004/0134513).
Regarding claim 20, although the present combination of Kweon and Hu teaches immersing the substrate in a wetting solution in the transfer module, it fails to specifically teach immersing the substrate in a wetting solution retrained in the substrate carrier, wherein the substrate carrier has an inner volume for retaining a bath wetting solution. However, Lu also teaches a substrate processing method (abstract; figs 1A and 1B) wherein after a treatment of the substrate, it is transferred in a carrier (28) (para 0019) and immersed in a wetting solution retrained in the substrate carrier (para 0020 and claims 1 and 5), wherein the substrate carrier has an inner volume for retaining the wetting solution (para 0020 and claims 1 and 5) (carrier 28 holds a batch of at least one wafer implicitly reads on the carrier having an inner volume for retaining wetting solution when immersing the substrate in a bath) in order to achieve the predictable result of effectively rinsing the substrate while transferring it for further processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of the present combination of Kweon and Hu by immersing the substrate in a wetting solution retrained in the substrate carrier, wherein the substrate carrier has an inner volume for retaining the wetting solution as taught by Lu in order to achieve the predictable result of effectively rinsing the substrate while transferring it for further processing.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-8 and 9-15 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The closest prior art of record is Toyamura et al. (PG Pub U.S 2019/0115230), Davenport (WO1999051398A), and Kweon et al. (PG Pub U.S 2017/0323807).
28. The combination of Toyamura and Davenport teaches the limitations of claim 1 but fails to teach wherein spraying the substrate being transferred by the transporter with the wetting solution comprises: injecting flow streams of the wetting solution across the substrate in a substrate carrier as recited in claim 6.
29. Kweon teaches a method, comprising: loading a substrate to a polishing tool comprising: a polishing module; a cleaning module; and a transfer module operable to transfer substrates from the polishing module to the cleaning module; wherein the transfer module comprises a substrate wetting device; polishing a surface of the substrate in a first polishing station of the polishing module; unloading the substrate from a first polishing head in the first polishing station and transferring the substrate from the first polishing station to the substrate wetting device and covering the substrate surface with a wetting solution; transferring the substrate from the substrate wetting device to a first cleaning station in the cleaning module; and cleaning the substrate in the first cleaning station.
30. Kweon fails to teach wherein the substrate wetting device comprises a conveyor belt and one or more nozzles, and transferring the substrate comprises: continuously moving the substrate along the conveyor belt; and spraying the wetting solution to the device surface of the substrate while the substrate is moving on the conveyor belt as recited in claim 9.
Conclusion
31. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PRADHUMAN PARIHAR whose telephone number is (571)270-1633. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am-6pm 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, Kaj Olsen can be reached on 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.
/P.P/Examiner, Art Unit 1714
/KAJ K OLSEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1714