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.
Claim 6 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 6 recites the limitation "the number of heaters" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1 recites the heater in singular form while claim 6 recite “the number of heaters”. It is unclear if the heaters recited in claim 6 are different to that recited in claim 1 or applicant merely intended to indicate that multiple heaters may be provided one the base including the heater recited in claim 1. It is believed that applicant meant to indicate that one or more heaters is provided on the base inclusive of the heater recited in claim 1, and will be interpreted as such for examination purposes.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 12, 17, & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park (KR20150138975A1).
As to claims 1 & 17, Park discloses a substrate treating apparatus (abstract) comprising: a treating chamber (interior of ref 2510) for removing organic solvents remaining on a substrate from the substrate by using a supercritical fluid [0024, 0049, & 0067-0082]; a transfer unit (combination of refs 2210 & 2552 along with components connecting ref 2552 to ref 2550 for movement of ref 2550) for loading and unloading the substrate into and from a treatment space in which the substrate is treated in the treating chamber [0047-0049]; a heating unit (ref 2550, an ultraviolet ray supplying unit intrinsically provides some amount of heat and thereby reads on a heating unit) provided to be loaded into and unloaded from the treatment space (see Figs.8-11), and for cleaning the treatment space by heating [0083-0084 & 0086-0087]; wherein the treating chamber includes a chamber body (ref 2510) providing the treatment space, wherein the chamber body includes an upper body (ref 2512) and a lower body (ref 2514) which are combined with each other to provide the treatment space (see Figs.4 & 7-13); a support unit (ref 2530) for supporting the substrate within the treatment space; a fluid supply unit (see Fig.3 refs 2540 & 2560) for supplying the supercritical fluid to the treatment space [0069 & 0078-0080]; a driver (ref 2516) for moving the upper body or the lower body so that a relative position between the upper body and the lower body is changed [0073-0074]; and the heating unit includes a base (ref 2550) and a heater (ref 2551) installed on the base (see also Figs.4 & 8-11, showcasing lamps provided on the base).
As to claim 2, Park teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein there is a reasonable expectation that the shape of the base is a shape which shape is at least somewhat supportable by the support unit. It is noted that such a limitation merely requires the shape of the base to be a shape which is supportable, the claim does not require the actual base being supported by the support unit. Thus, any shape can be at least somewhat support by the support unit, and thus the shape of the base can be considered to be a shape that is supportable by the support unit.
As to claims 12 & 20, Park teaches the apparatus of claim 1 & 17, wherein the heater is a light emitting unit that emits light [0083].
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.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (KR20150138975A1) in view of Jang (US20180190485A1).
As to claim 3, Park teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the chamber body includes an upper body (ref 2512) and a lower body (ref 2514) which are combined with each other to provide the treatment space (see Figs.4 & 7-13); the support unit has a shape which supports an edge region of the substrate on the upper body (see Figs.4 & 7-13); a filler (ref 2546) is provided in a position opposite the substrate supported on the support unit under the support unit. Park does not disclose a support pin provided on a top surface of the filler which can support the base. However, the use of a support pin on a filler is known in the art, as seen by Jang.
Jang discloses an art related substrate processing apparatus using supercritical fluid (abstract), wherein it is shown that a filler (ref 140) can be provided with support pins (ref 150, 152, or 153). Although Jang states that the support pins are for supporting a substrate, one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably glean from the reference that support pins can be provided on a filler unit in order to support an element disposed above the filler.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Park to utilize support pins on the filler in order to support an element above the filler (Jang [0035, 0042, 0078]). Since the heating unit is provided above the filler unit, a skilled artisan would recognize that the support pins may be provided in order to support the heater unit above the filler. A skilled artisan recognizes that such a modification would allow for further support of the heater when positioned within the treatment chamber, as thus would be logically obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim(s) 4-5 & 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (KR20150138975A1) in view of Jung (US20220013393A1).
As to claim 4, Park teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the transfer unit includes a substrate carrier which appears to utilize a hand coupled to the carrier (Fig.1 & [0048]) to move forwardly and backwardly (see Figs.6 & 12-13); and a heating unit carrier (ref 2552 up to ref 2550) to which the heating unit is coupled and which is provided to be forwardly and backwardly movable (see Figs.8-11). Assuming arguendo that Park does not explicitly show the presence of a hand, such a feature is known in the art, as seen by Jung.
Jung discloses an art related substrate treatment apparatus (abstract), utilizing a supercritical processing unit [0056]. Jung further shows that a substrate transfer unit is provided with hands and a substrate carrier coupled to the hands (see Fig.4) to allow for transferring of the substrate from one location to another (see Figs.5-8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Park to utilize the substrate transfer unit of Jung in order to transfer substrates from one location to another. It is in the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a known substrate transfer structure when one is not explicitly detailed with a reasonable expectation of success.
As to claim 5, Modified Park teaches the apparatus of claim 4, wherein the heating unit carrier and the substrate carrier are spaced apart in upper and lower directions (see Park Figs.4 & 7-13, showcasing different height levels for each the substrate carrier and the heating carrier).
As to claim 9, Park teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the heating unit is moveable by the transfer unit (Parks Figs.8-13); a controller is provided to control the heating unit and a portion of the transfer unit (Park [0010-0012 & 0086-0087]), and the controller controls the heating unit to clean the treatment space when provided in the transfer unit (i.e., in this interpretation the component connecting ref 2552 to ref 2550 is the part of the transfer unit cited in which the heating unit is provided in). Although Park does indicate that the controller controls the portion of the transfer unit for the heating unit (Park [0010-0012 & 0086-0087]) Park does not explicitly disclose the controller controlling the transfer unit which loads and unloads the substrate into the treatment space. There is a reasonable expectation that the controller would be provided with relevant programming in order to operate the transfer unit for loading and unloading the substrate as desired (see Park Figs.6-13). Further, the use of a controller to control the operation of a substrate transferring element into a chamber is known in the art, as seen by Jung.
Jung discloses an art related substrate treatment apparatus (abstract), utilizing a supercritical processing unit [0056]. Jung further shows that a substrate transfer unit (see Fig.4) is provided with a controller that allows for controlling the operation of the transfer unit [0085-0086] in order to transfer the substrate from one area to another (see Figs.5-8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Park to provide the controller with programming to control the transfer unit in order to allow for movement of the substrate into and out of the treatment space (Jung [0085-0086 & Figs.5-8) as desired by Park.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (KR20150138975A1) in view of Jung (US20220013393A1) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Han (US20200009621A1).
As to claim 6, Modified Park teaches the apparatus of claim 4, wherein the number of heaters is one or more (see Park Figs.8-11 showcasing lamps on ref 2551), the base is coupled to the heating unit carrier (see Park Fig.4 ref 2550 connection to ref 2552 and dashed line). Although Park does not explicitly showcase openings in the base to receive the heaters, such a feature is a well-known manner for installing UV lights, as seen by Han.
Han discloses an art related substrate processing unit utilizing UV light (abstract), wherein it is shown that a known manner of installing a UV light into a base is through the use of an opening penetrating the base (see Figs.8-9 refs 1462, 1466, & 1424b provided in base Fig.7 ref 1422).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Park to provide openings penetrating the base in upper and lower directions in order to install the UV light, as is known in the art (Han Figs.7-9). It is in the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a known manner of installing UV lights into a light supplying unit when one is not explicitly detailed with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (KR20150138975A1) in view of Jang (US20180190485A1) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Jung (US20220013393A1).
As to claim 8, Modified Park teaches the apparatus of claim 3, further comprising a controller for controlling the heating unit and a portion of the transfer unit to cause the heating unit to clean the treatment space in the state where the heating unit is supported (Park [0010-0012 & 0086-0087]). As the modification provides support for the heating unit when placed in the treatment space, a skilled artisan would find it obvious to perform said cleaning of the treatment space when the heating unit is supported on the pin. Although Park does indicate that the controller controls the portion of the transfer unit for the heating unit (Park [0010-0012 & 0086-0087]) Park does not explicitly disclose the controller controlling the transfer unit which loads and unloads the substrate into the treatment space. There is a reasonable expectation that the controller would be provided with relevant programming in order to operate the transfer unit for loading and unloading the substrate as desired (see Park Figs.6-13). Further, the use of a controller to control the operation of a substrate transferring element into a chamber is known in the art, as seen by Jung.
Jung discloses an art related substrate treatment apparatus (abstract), utilizing a supercritical processing unit [0056]. Jung shows that a substrate transfer unit (see Fig.4) is provided with a controller that allows for controlling the operation of the transfer unit [0085-0086] in order to transfer the substrate from one area to another (see Figs.5-8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Park to provide the controller with programming to control the transfer unit in order to allow for movement of the substrate into and out of the treatment space (Jung [0085-0086 & Figs.5-8) as desired by Park.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (KR20150138975A1) in view of Jung (US20220013393A1) as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Kim (KR20130014311A).
As to claim 11, Park teaches the apparatus of claim 9, wherein the treating chamber includes a housing (Park Figs.1 & 4 ref 2500) enclosing the chamber body and formed with an inlet (inherently present as ref 2210 needs to transfer substrate into chamber, see Fig.1) through which the substrate is loaded; an exhaust unit (ref 2556) for exhausting an outer region of the chamber body within the housing; and the chamber body includes an upper body (ref 2512) and a lower body (ref 2514) which are combined with each other to provide the treatment space (see Figs.4 & 7-13); a driver (ref 2516) for moving the upper body or the lower body so that a relative position between the upper body and the lower body is changed [0073-0074]. Further, as Park desires the control of the lifting member in order to insert the heating unit and clean the treatment chamber, a skilled artisan would reasonably expect that the controller is provided with relevant programming to control the driver. However, Park does not explicitly state that the controller controls the driver, but such a feature is known in the art, as seen by Kim.
Kim discloses an art related supercritical substrate treating apparatus (abstract), wherein it is known to utilize a controller for operating a driver that opens and closes a housing having two opposing member (Figs.4-9 & [0129-0132]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Park to provide the controller with programming to control the driver in order to allow for closing and opening of the treatment space (Figs.4-9 & [0129-0132]) as desired by Park for performing a cleaning process. Although Park indicates that the chamber may be closed during cleaning [0087], Park also showcases that the upper and lower body may be spaced apart from one another such that the treatment space may be provided in an open state during cleaning of the treatment space (see Fig.9). Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect that the providing the chamber in an open state during cleaning merely represents a design choice (see MPEP 2144.04).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (KR20150138975A1) in view of Jang (US20180190485A1) and Jung (US20220013393A1).
As to claim 19, Park teaches the apparatus of claim 17, further comprising a controller is provided to control the heating unit and a portion of the transfer unit (Park [0010-0012 & 0086-0087]), and the controller controls the heating unit to clean the treatment space when provided in the transfer unit (i.e., in this interpretation the component connecting ref 2552 to ref 2550 is the part of the transfer unit cited in which the heating unit is provided in); the support unit has a shape which supports an edge region of the substrate on the upper body (see Figs.4 & 7-13); a filler (ref 2546) is provided in a position opposite the substrate supported on the support unit under the support unit. Although Park does indicate that the controller controls the portion of the transfer unit for the heating unit (Park [0010-0012 & 0086-0087]) Park does not explicitly disclose the controller controlling the transfer unit which loads and unloads the substrate into the treatment space. There is a reasonable expectation that the controller would be provided with relevant programming in order to operate the transfer unit for loading and unloading the substrate as desired (see Park Figs.6-13). Further, the use of a controller to control the operation of a substrate transferring element into a chamber is known in the art, as seen by Jung. Park does not disclose a support pin provided on a top surface of the filler which can support the base. However, the use of a support pin on a filler is known in the art, as seen by Jang.
Jung discloses an art related substrate treatment apparatus (abstract), utilizing a supercritical processing unit [0056]. Jung further shows that a substrate transfer unit (see Fig.4) is provided with a controller that allows for controlling the operation of the transfer unit [0085-0086] in order to transfer the substrate from one area to another (see Figs.5-8).
Jang discloses an art related substrate processing apparatus using supercritical fluid (abstract), wherein it is shown that a filler (ref 140) can be provided with support pins (ref 150, 152, or 153). Although Jang states that the support pins are for supporting a substrate, one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably glean from the reference that support pins can be provided on a filler unit in order to support an element disposed above the filler.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Park to utilize support pins on the filler in order to support an element above the filler (Jang [0035, 0042, 0078]). Since the heating unit is provided above the filler unit, a skilled artisan would recognize that the support pins may be provided in order to support the heater unit above the filler. A skilled artisan recognizes that such a modification would allow for further support of the heater when positioned within the treatment chamber, as thus would be logically obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. A skilled artisan would also find it obvious to modify Park to provide the controller with programming to control the transfer unit in order to allow for movement of the substrate into and out of the treatment space (Jung [0085-0086 & Figs.5-8) as desired by Park.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 10, & 18 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 phrase “controller controls” is understood to be a phrase requiring the controller be configured to perform any commands following thereafter.
The closest prior art of record is that recited above, as utilized in the rejection. However, the references utilized fail to teach or suggest the inventions of claims 7, 10, & 18. The references fail to teach or suggest the remaining limitations in which Park is deficient, along with corresponding rationale to combine such teachings/suggestion in manner to render the inventions of claims 7, 10, & 18 obvious. Thus, claims 7, 10, & 18 are considered to contain allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Sumi (US20240055277A1) discloses different locations for a heater (Figs. 5A-6B refs 155, 155a, & 155b) within a supercritical processing chamber (abstract). However, the locations are either provided integrated within the chamber and integrated with a substrate support that is moved into and out of the chamber.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAIR CHAUDHRI whose telephone number is (571)272-4773. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:00am to 5:00pm 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, Michael Barr can be reached at (571)272-1414. 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.
/OMAIR CHAUDHRI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711