DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Acknowledgements
This office action is in response to the application filed 12/23/2024.
Claims 1-10 are pending and have been examined.
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 10 is 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 10 recites the limitation "crossing shape" in line 4. It is unclear as recited what constitutes a “crossing shape” or what shapes are being crossed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
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 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2019/0318946 A1) in view of Tsuru (US 2002/0102510 A1).
Kim discloses a substrate treatment apparatus (abstract) comprising:
a substrate-holding unit (ref. 210, see figs. 4-5, ¶ [0082]) for holding and rotating a substrate;
a treatment liquid feed unit (ref. 300, see fig. 4, ¶ [0063], [0074]) for feeding treatment liquid to a top or underside of the substrate held by the substrate-holding unit;
a heating unit (ref. 900, see figs. 4-5) located under the substrate to heat the substrate;
a blocking plate (ref. 220, see figs. 4-5, ¶ [0082], [0084]) located on the substrate-holding unit above the heating unit in such a way as to allow light to pass therethrough toward the substrate and to prevent the treatment liquid from entering the heating unit (see fig. 4);
Kim does not disclose an upper sensor located above the blocking plate to constitute one of a light transmitter and a light receiver; and a lower sensor located under the blocking plate to constitute the other, wherein a quantity of light irradiated from the light transmitter and thus reaching the light receiver is measured to allow the light transmittance of the blocking plate to be obtained.
However, Tsuru discloses it is well-known in the substrate processing art (abstract) to provide an upper sensor located above the blocking plate to constitute one of a light transmitter and a light receiver; and a lower sensor located under the blocking plate to constitute the other, wherein a quantity of light irradiated from the light transmitter and thus reaching the light receiver is measured to allow the light transmittance of the blocking plate to be obtained (refs. 9 and 12, light emitting section and light receiving section respectively, ¶ [0011]).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the substrate treatment apparatus of Kim to further include an upper sensor and a lower sensor, as claimed, as suggested by Tsuru, in order to determine light transmittance, to maintain the temperature of the wafer, and determine when a blocking plate needs changing.
Re claim 2, Regarding “wherein the upper sensor and the lower sensor are connected to light production and measurement devices through optical fibers, and the light production and measurement devices are connected to a controller”, Tsuru further converting received light into an electrical signal (¶ [0014]) and feedback control (¶ [0017]). Here, the use of controllers and optical fibers for control and transfer of light-based signal is conventionally known in the art and would have been an obvious engineering expedient for purposes of controlling/maintaining temperature.
Re claim 3, Regarding “wherein two or more sets of the upper sensor and the lower sensor are provided at different positions in a radial direction of the substrate about a center of the substrate”, Tsuru further disclose a plurality of transmission type sensors (¶ [0019]) including arranged in a lattice manner or in a honeycomb manner (¶ [0019]) to divide into multiple zones to maintain uniformity of the temperature distribution of the wafer. Here, the arrangement in a radial direction being prima facie obvious to ensure detection evenly over the blocking plate. See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C) Rearrangement of Parts.
Re claim 4, Regarding “wherein the upper sensor and the lower sensor have respective light collection lenses”, the use of lenses in light-based sensors are conventionally known for purposes of focusing and/or filtering light and/or protecting the electronic components. Here, the inclusion of a lens does not patentably distinguish over the prior art.
Re claim 5, Regarding “wherein a light source applied to the light transmitter is an LED or laser light”, here, the selection of an LED or laser for the light of Tsuru for purposes of quantitatively measure light transmittance would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, where it is understood that LEDs or lasers are low-power or high-output with consistent output for quantitative measurements. See MPEP 2144.07 Art Recognized Suitability for an Intended Purpose.
Re claim 6, Regarding “wherein the light transmittance on at various points on a concentric circle, about a center of substrate, of the blocking plate can be measured through the rotation of the substrate-holding unit”, Kim further discloses the blocking plate located on the chuck stage (see figs. 4-5, ¶ [0084]) and is therefore expected to rotate with the chuck stage.
Re claim 7, Regarding “wherein the lower sensor is located under the substrate-holding unit, and the substrate-holding unit and the heating unit have first light passing hole and second light passing hole formed thereon to allow the light irradiated from the light transmitter to pass therethrough respectively”, Tsuru further discloses the lower substrate under the substrate-holding unit (ref. 9 below ref. 5) and the substrate-holding unit and the heating unit having holes to allow the light to pass therethrough (ref. 5 appears empty at passing point of light from 9 to 12, and hollow tubes in heating unit refs. 7 and 10, ¶ [0012]). Regarding “first” and “second”, Tsuru discloses plural transmission-type sensors and it thus being obvious to provide holes for each.
Re claim 8, Regarding “wherein, in plan view, the first light passing hole formed on the substrate-holding unit extends in a circular direction about the center of the substrate to have a shape of arc and includes the position of the lower sensor”, Kim further discloses the substrate-holding unit extending in a circular direction (see figs. 3) about the center of the substrate, and having openings between and circumferentially surrounding support pins 224 and chucking pins 212. Thus, the openings between supports pins and support pins and chucking pins to chucking pins being arcs, and the openings between support pins and chucking pins being a 360 arc.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2019/0318946 A1) in view of Tsuru (US 2002/0102510 A1), as applied above, and further in view of Maleeve et al. (US 2023/0057763 A1).
Re claim 9, Kim/Tsuru discloses as shown above, and Tsuru further discloses measuring multiple zones of the blocking plate/glass, but does not disclose wherein the upper sensor and the lower sensor reciprocate in a radial direction about a center of the substrate, and the first light passing hole and the second light passing hole extend in the radial direction respectively. However, Maleeve discloses it is known in the substrate treatment art (abstract) to provide optical sensors that are mounted on a movable arm (¶ [0059], [0069], [0074]), in order to monitor the contamination of a consumable component (¶ [0020]). Regarding the first light passing hole and the second light passing hole extending in the radial direction, it is prima facie obvious that the holes must be formed somewhere along the radial direction in order to enable the monitoring of the entirety of the blocking plate.
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the plurality of sensors of Kim/Tsuru with independently movable sensors, as suggested by Maleeve, in order to monitor multiple locations of the blocking plate.
Re claim 10, Regarding “wherein the first light passing hole further extends in an circular direction about the center of the substrate so that the first light passing hole has crossing shape in the radial direction and circular direction”, as discussed above, the substrate-holding unit of Kim comprises simply pins, here, the “hole” extends in both the radial direction and circular direction.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US20060063280A1 note optical fibers and light sensors.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7299. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am to 6:30pm.
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 on 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.
KEVIN G. LEE
Examiner
Art Unit 1711
/KEVIN G LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 1711
Prosecution Insights