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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I in the reply filed on 4/3/2026 is acknowledged. Per applicant’s Amendment, claims 1-12 and 21-28 are pending and are seen to pertain to the elected invention.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 recites “activating a control valve disposed between the second outlet and the nozzle in order to provide the solution to the manufacturing operation”, which is supported by specification para 64. This limitation is confusing in light of FIGs 3-4, where the control valve 178 is fluidly between the first outlet (bottom opening of 304) of the valve (304) and nozzle (123).
In light of an interview with the applicant (see interview summary), this is seen as a minor typographical error and “the second outlet” will be understood as –the first outlet—for examination.
Appropriate correction is required. It is also noted that this confusing language is in specification para 64, which would require corresponding correction.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 3, and 6-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chang et al (US 20080286441).
Regarding claim 1, Chang (FIGs 1-5) discloses “A method, comprising:
circulating a solution (entering 29 in FIG 3) from a tank (20 in FIG 1, representative of 21 in FIG 3, para 76-77) using a pump (5);
receiving the solution from the pump at an inlet of a valve (7, via 9);
when a manufacturing operation occurs, directing the solution to a first outlet of the valve (right opening, to 4) that is connected to a nozzle (41) used in the manufacturing operation (of 11/12);
when the manufacturing operation is idle, directing the solution to a second outlet of the valve (top opening of 7) connected to a recirculation path (8); and
recirculating the solution back to the tank via the recirculation path for re-use in the manufacturing operation (para 50).”
Regarding claim 3, Chang (FIGs 1-5) discloses “further comprising:
circulating the solution in a second circulation path (FIG 3; 30) between the pump (downstream of A in FIG 3) and a filter (25) when the manufacturing operation is idle.”
Regarding claim 6, Chang (FIGs 1-5) discloses “wherein:
the solution is at least one selected from the group consisting of a photoresist solution (para 74, read on “photoresist solution”), a photoresist developer solution, a positive tone developer (PTD), a negative tone developer (NTD), a reduce resist consumption (RRC) solvent, an acid solution, a basic solution, a cleaning solution, water, and an organic solvent.”
Regarding claim 7, Chang (FIGs 1-5) discloses “A method, comprising:
circulating a solution from a storage container (22) to a tank (29, part of 20 in FIG 1, para 76-77);
circulating the solution (via 5) from the tank (20) to an inlet of a three-way T-valve (7) by a circulation path (9);
directing the solution to a first outlet of the T-valve (right opening of 7) that is connected to a nozzle (41);
applying the solution through the nozzle by opening the first outlet (para 45);
after applying the solution through the nozzle (switching step in para 58), directing the unused solution remaining in the circulation path to a second outlet of the T-valve (top opening of 7) that is connected to a recirculation path (8) having a different path than the circulation path (9); and
recirculating the solution back to the tank via the recirculation path for re-use by opening the second outlet (para 58).”
Regarding claim 8, Chang (FIGs 1-5) discloses “wherein the solution is mixed with a solvent (23, para 74) after leaving the storage container (at 24, downstream of 22) and before entering the tank (upstream of 29).”
Regarding claim 9, Chang (FIGs 1-5) discloses “wherein during circulating the solution from the tank to the T-valve, the solution passes through a pump (5).”
Regarding claim 10, Chang (FIGs 1-5) discloses “wherein the solution is applied onto a substrate (11), and the substrate is a silicon wafer (para 43, 73; while not outright stated it is understood in the art that the semiconductor wafer is necessarily silicon).”
Regarding claim 11, Chang (FIGs 1-5) discloses “wherein a controller (10) selectively controls opening and closing the first outlet and the second outlet (para 50, 58).”
Regarding claim 12, Chang (FIGs 1-5) discloses “wherein the solution is at least one selected from the group consisting of a photoresist solution (para 74, read on “photoresist solution”), a photoresist developer solution, a positive tone developer (PTD), a negative tone developer (NTD), a reduce resist consumption (RRC) solvent, an acid solution, a basic solution, a cleaning solution, water, and an organic solvent.”
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by James (US 4165187).
Regarding claim 1, James (FIG 1) discloses “A method, comprising:
circulating a solution (in 24) from a tank (24) using a pump (38);
receiving the solution from the pump at an inlet of a valve (left opening at 42);
when a manufacturing operation occurs, directing the solution to a first outlet (bottom opening at 42) of the valve that is connected to a nozzle (56) used in the manufacturing operation;
when the manufacturing operation is idle, directing the solution to a second outlet (top opening of 42, opening 46 via rotating 42 90 degrees clockwise from FIG 1) of the valve connected to a recirculation path (46); and
recirculating the solution back to the tank via the recirculation path (to 24 from 46) for re-use in the manufacturing operation.”
Regarding claim 2 as best understood, James (FIG 1) discloses “further comprising:
activating a control valve (50) disposed between the second outlet and the nozzle (between first outlet and 58) in order to provide the solution to the manufacturing operation.”
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.
Claim(s) 21, 23, and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over James.
Regarding claim 21, James (FIG 1) discloses “A method, comprising:
circulating a solution (in 24) from a tank (24) using a pump (38) through a circulation loop (counterclockwise loop 24>38>40>42[rotated 90 degrees clockwise from FIG 1]>46);
receiving the solution from the pump at an inlet of a T-valve (left opening of 42);
when a manufacturing operation occurs, directing the solution from the inlet to a first outlet of the T-valve (bottom opening of 42) through a control valve (50), wherein the first outlet is connected to the control valve through a conduit (48);
when the manufacturing operation is idle, directing the solution to a second outlet connected to a recirculation path (top opening of 42, opening 46 via rotating 42 90 degrees clockwise from FIG 1); and
recirculating the solution back to the tank via the recirculation path (46) for re-use in the manufacturing operation…”
James is silent regarding “wherein the conduit connecting the control valve to the T-valve has a length of 5 cm to 30 cm.” Although the conduit 48 is very short in FIG 1 relative to the rest of the system.
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date, to modify the size dimensions or scale of the system of James such that “wherein the conduit connecting the control valve to the T-valve has a length of 5 cm to 30 cm”, as James already discloses a short conduit, and choosing a preferred short conduit length to achieve the same expect result would be within routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 23, James (FIG 1) discloses “wherein during the manufacturing operation, the solution is dispensed from a nozzle (56) to a workpiece (M).”
Regarding claim 27, James as modified in claim 21 further teaches “wherein the conduit connecting the control valve to the T-valve has a length of 5 cm to 15 cm.”
It would have been further obvious, before the effective filing date, to modify the size dimensions or scale of the system of James such that “wherein the conduit connecting the control valve to the T-valve has a length of 5 cm to 15 cm”, as James already discloses a short conduit, and choosing a preferred short conduit length to achieve the same expect result would be within routine skill in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5, 22, 24-26, and 28 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:
Regarding claim 4, closest prior art of record Chang and James are respectively silent regarding “wherein: recirculating the solution back to the tank via the recirculation path comprises drawing back the solution from a tip of the nozzle.”
Applicant’s cited Makagawa (US 20080199596) does mention a vacuum flow in communication with the nozzle. However, this does not clearly occur through the aforementioned recirculation path.
Claim 4 is nonobvious for at least these Reasons.
Claim 5 is allowable by virtue of its dependency on claim 4.
Regarding claim 22, closest prior art of record James is silent regarding “wherein the control valve is an air-operated medical/chemical (AMC) control valve.”
Applicant’s cited Liao (US 20150048035, cited in parent application 17372148) does teach an AMC valve 258. However, this combination is nonobvious as the systems of James and Liao are significantly different.
Regarding claim 24, closest prior art of record James is silent regarding “wherein when a controller determines that a predetermined time has passed since the solution was dispensed by the nozzle, an interval dummy dispense of the nozzle is initiated by the controller.”
Even if art exists that teaches this feature in isolation, the combination in theory would be nonobvious as it would dramatically alter the system of James.
Claims 25-26 are allowable by virtue of their dependency on claim 24.
Regarding claim 28, closest prior art of record James is silent regarding “wherein before the solution is circulated from the tank through the circulation loop, the solution is transported to the tank from a solution container.”
While Chang teaches this isolated feature, the combination in theory would be nonobvious as it would dramatically alter the system of James.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Devices similar to the application are disclosed by Yoshida (US 8844545), Curtiss et al (US 6740163), Mayer et al (US 20040065540).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK C WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)431-0767. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:00 PM.
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, Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881. 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.
/PATRICK C WILLIAMS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights