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 1-9 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.
The claims are indefinite because it is not clear from claim 1 whether or not the recited cooling system is a part of the claimed apparatus.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 10-12, 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen et al (US 2021/0272798).
Chen et al teach a method as claimed.
The method comprises:
Loading a wafer 102 in a cleaning apparatus 150 (150b, 150c);
Generating with a cooling system 300 a cleaning liquid having a temperature below room temperature (at least [0013], [0036], [0044]);
Delivering the liquid to a first nozzle above the wafer and a second nozzle below the wafer (at least nozzles 226, 227 and 234, 236; Figure 2 and the related description); and
Cleaning the top and the bottom surfaces of the wafer with the cleaning liquid from the nozzles (at least nozzles 226, 227 and 234, 236; Figure 2 and the related description).
See at least Figures 2-4 and the related description and the description at [0024] - [0044].
As to claims 11 and 15:
Chen et al teach measuring the temperature of the liquid flowing from the cooling system to the nozzles with a temperature sensor 336 (at least Figures 3A, 3B and the related description).
As to claim 12:
Chen et al teach controlling flow rate of the cleaning liquid with a valve (308, 318, 324) on a pipe connected to the nozzles (at least Figures 2 and 3A, 3B).
As to claim 14:
The temperature as claimed is disclosed by Chen et al at least at [0013], [0036], [0044].
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.
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 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) 1-10, 13, and 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al (US 2021/0272798) in view of any one of Fujiwara et al (US 2007/0235062), Franklin (US 2007/0084481), Mizohata et al (US 2004/0140199), Taniyama (US 2003/0102017) and Tateyama et al (US 5,375,291).
As to claims 1 and 13 and all claims:
The discussion of Chen et al provided above is incorporated here.
Chen et al teach an apparatus 150, 150b comprising:
A wafer holder 222 holding a wafer 102;
A first nozzle (any one of multiple nozzles 227 above wafer 102 on Figure 2);
A second nozzle (any one of multiple nozzles 227 below wafer 102 on Figure 2);
And
A cooling system 300.
See at least Figures 2-4 and the related description and the description at [0024] - [0044].
The temperatures as recited by claim 1 are disclosed at least at [0013], [0036], [0044].
Chen et al do not specifically state the support 222 is configured to rotate the wafer 102.
However, rotating wafers during processing by rotatable holders is conventional in the art as evidenced by Fujiwara et al, Franklin, Mizohata et al, Taniyama and Tateyama et al.
See at least Figures 6, 9, 11 and the related description of Fujiwara et al, Figure 1 and the related description of Franklin, Figure 9 and the related description of Mizohata et al, Figure 7 and the related description of Taniyama and Figures 3, 6, 7 and the related description of Tateyama et al.
It would have been obvious to an ordinary artisan at the time the invention was filed to provide a rotatable holder in the apparatus of Chen et al in order to rotate the wafer during the treatment to fully treat the surface of the wafer and in order to use a known device for its known purpose.
As to claim 2:
The third and the second nozzles as claimed are readable on the left and the right nozzles 227 provided below the wafer 102 on Figure 2.
As to claims 3 and 5:
The pipe as claimed is readable at least on pipe 229.
As to claim 4:
Chen et al do not exemplify a valve on the pipe connecting the nozzles to the cooling system 300.
However, such was known in the art as evidenced at least by Fujiwara et al (at least Figures 6, 9), Mizohata et al (at least Figure 9), Taniyama (at least Figures 6, 8) and Tateyama et al (at least Figures 3, 4, 6, 7).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary artisan at the time the invention was filed to provide valves as disclosed by Fujiwara et al, Mizohata et al, Taniyama and Tateyama et al in the apparatus of Chen in order to use a known device for its known purpose and to further control processing.
As to claims 6:
The temperatures as recited by the claim are disclosed at least at [0013], [0036], [0044].
As to claims 7 and 8:
Chen et al do not exemplify temperature sensors on the nozzles.
However, such was known in the art as evidenced at least by Franklin (at least Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary artisan at the time the invention was filed to provide sensors as disclosed by Franklin in the apparatus of Chen in order to use a known device for its known purpose and to further control processing.
As to claim 8:
It would have been obvious to an ordinary artisan at the time the invention was filed to provide referenced sensors of the modified apparatus of Chen et al capable of measuring the temperatures disclosed by Chen et al in order to control processing disclosed by Chen et al. Such will meet the limitations recited by claim 8.
As to claim 9:
The use of DI water is disclosed by Chen et al at least at [0035].
As to claims 16-20:
The controller recited by claim 16 is readable on the controller 500 of Chen et al. See at least Figure 5 and the description at [0062-71].
As to claim 17:
The pipe as claimed is readable at least on pipe 229 of Chen et al.
Chen et al do not exemplify a valve on the pipe connecting the nozzles to the cooling system 300.
However, such was known in the art as evidenced at least by Fujiwara et al (at least Figures 6, 9), Mizohata et al (at least Figure 9), Taniyama (at least Figures 6, 8) and Tateyama et al (at least Figures 3, 4, 6, 7).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary artisan at the time the invention was filed to provide valves as disclosed by Fujiwara et al, Mizohata et al, Taniyama and Tateyama et al in the apparatus of Chen in order to use a known device for its known purpose and to further control processing.
As to claim 18:
The temperatures as recited by the claim are disclosed at least at [0013], [0036], [0044] of Chen et al.
As to claim 19:
Chen et al do not exemplify temperature sensors on the nozzles.
However, such was known in the art as evidenced at least by Franklin (at least Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary artisan at the time the invention was filed to provide sensors as disclosed by Franklin in the apparatus of Chen in order to use a known device for its known purpose and to further control processing.
Further, it would have been obvious to an ordinary artisan at the time the invention was filed to provide referenced sensors of the modified apparatus of Chen et al capable of measuring the temperatures disclosed by Chen et al in order to control processing disclosed by Chen et al. Such will meet the limitations recited by the claim.
As to claim 20:
Since Chen et al teaches the cooling device as comprising refrigeration compressor (at least [0044]) the pipes and the tank as claimed are obviously present.
As to the diameter of the pipe:
It would have been obvious to an ordinary artisan at the time the invention was filed to find an optimum diameter of the pipe by routine experimentation depending from the size and the specifics of the equipment used.
The sensor recited by the claim is readable on the sensor 336 recited by Chen et al.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The documents listed on the attached PTO 892 are cited to show the state of the art with respect to apparatuses and methods for processing substrates.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER MARKOFF whose telephone number is (571)272-1304. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:30 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, 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.
/ALEXANDER MARKOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711
Prosecution Insights