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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending as filed October 9, 2025.
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 1-20 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 1, line 2 refers to preparing a “wafer” for deposition, and line 12 has performing submersion of “the wafer”, but line 3 refers to forming a layer above “a substrate”. As worded, it is unclear if the “wafer” is also the “substrate”. For the purpose of examination, it is understood that the “wafer” is also the “substrate” but applicant should clarify what is intended, without adding new matter. This rejection also applies to claims 9 and 16.
The dependent claims do not cure the defects of the claims from which they depend and are therefore also rejected.
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 (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 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.
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.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tutt et al (US 2007/0281249) in view of Kawaguchi et al (US 2004/0170930) and Manzi, et al “Plasma Jet Printing: An Introduction” (hereinafter Manzi article), EITHER alone OR further in view of Lauterbach et al (US 2004/0092079).
Claim 1: Tutt teaches a method of forming a patterned conductive film (note figure 5, 0002, 0081-0082, where circuit patterns can be formed). A substate, which can be a wafer (note 0041), is prepared for deposition, with a method comprising forming at least a layer above a substrate/wafer (since the substate can include functional layers, it would have at least been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the layers would predictably and acceptably be provided on the substrate/wafer for use, onto which layers the further masking/deposition treatment is to be provided) (note 0041). A photoresist layer is applied on the substrate/layer, where the photoresist material is patterned, forming a mask with a plurality of openings (note figures 1, 2, 0040-0046, the resist acts as a mask as shown by figures 3-4). A printer, such as an ink jet printer, would be provided to deposit an ink/solution comprising nanoparticles, since a solution of nanoparticles is to be deposited over the photoresist, and where this can be done by ink jet printing, so a printer would be needed for such as process (note 0071-0072, and as well any method for the application of such a coating/solution can be used). Nanoparticles are deposited by the printing/deposition process where a first portion of nanoparticles would be deposited on the exposed layer/substrate and a second portion of nanoparticles would be deposited on an uppermost surface of the mask (note figure 3, 0071-0072). The nanoparticles can be metal material (note 0073). Thereafter, the wafer/substrate is placed in a bath of solvent (so considered submerged, or at least suggested to be submerged so that the substate is “in” the bath) such that portions of the photoresist material in contact with the layer/substate are dissolved to dislocate the second portion of the nanoparticles and leave the first portion of the nanoparticles to form the patterned conductive film (note figure 4, 0078-0079, 0085, 0089).
(A) As to using an aqueous solution for dissolving the photoresist, Tutt describes using an acetone bath (note 0089), but broadly teaches that solvent in general can be use (note 0078-0079).
Kawaguchi describes how a photoresist layer 23 can be applied and patterned, and then metal material can be applied over the photoresist providing metal layers 11, 12 (note figures 2-6), where it is then described to strip the metal layers by soaking the structure including the photoresist and metal layers in an aqueous solution (with NaOH) that dissolves the photoresist layer (note figure 7, 0043, 0049-0050). The dissolving can occur over a short time, such as around three minutes (note 0049).
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 Tutt to use an aqueous solution for the dissolving of the photoresist as suggested by Kawaguchi with an expectation of predictably acceptable results, since Tutt applies metal material over photoresist and then dissolves the photoresist with solvent, and Kawaguchi teaches that when providing applied patterned photoresist, with metal applied over the photoresist, aqueous solutions can be conventionally provided as a solvent system to dissolve the photoresist.
(B) As to the use of a plasma jet printer, Tutt describes that any method of application for liquid coating can be used to apply the ink/solution of nanoparticles, including ink jet printing (note 0071-0072).
Manzi articles describes plasma jet printing can be provided, and how it is a desirable alternative to ink jet printing (IJP) (note abstract, Introduction Section). It is described how a plasma jet printer can be provided for such printing, where the printer would have print head assembly, which would be directed towards where the application is to occur, where the assembly includes an ink dispenser with an nanoparticle module (since the ink dispenser/module holds and dispenses ink with nanoparticles (NP)) (note figures 1-2, Sections III and IV).
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 Tutt in view of Kawaguchi to provide the nanoparticle deposition using a plasma jet printer with a print head assembly that is directed towards an opening within the plurality of openings in the photoresist, where the assembly includes a ink dispenser comprising a nanoparticle module as suggested by Manzi article with an expectation of desirable printing results, since Tutt indicates depositing ink/solution with nanoparticles by any method for such coating including ink jet printing, and the depositing would be in openings in the pattern, and Manzi article indicates that plasma jet printing with a plasma jet printer is a desirable alternative to ink jet printing, where it is indicated that ink with nanoparticles can be used and the printer would have a a print head assembly that is directed towards where deposition is desired (which here would be an opening within the plurality of openings in the photoresist), where the assembly includes a ink dispenser comprising a nanoparticle module.
(C) Optionally, further using Lauterbach, as to specifically providing the substrate wafer with a coating before providing the conductive pattern, Lauterbach further indicates how a coated substrate can be provided forming at least a layer above the substrate before a photoresist applied to the layer, patterned with openings and metal conductive layers formed in the openings corresponding to a circuit pattern (note substrate 600, layers 601, 602, resist 605 and metal layers 604, figures 6a-6d, 0081-0084).
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 Tutt in view of Kawaguchi and Manzi article to specifically provide at least a layer on the substrate wafer before the photoresist and conductive metal nanoparticles applied with the resist applied on the layer as suggested by Lauterbach with an expectation of predictably acceptable results, because Tutt is providing making circuits and Lauterbach indicates that in such systems it is conventional to provide a layer on the substrate before applying photoresist masking and conductive metal patterns.
Claim 2: As to the submersion of the wafer in aqueous solution further comprises agitating the solution by performing sonication for at least 30 seconds, Tutt describes how sonication can be provided during the solvent bath treatment, describing 15 seconds with an acetone bath (note 0089), and Kawaguchi describes that when using an aqueous bath for photoresist dissolving, a time of around three minutes can be used (note 0049), in the claimed range. Therefore, when using sonication as described by Tutt with an aqueous solvent bath, it would have been obvious to optimize the time for the specific bath and resist used, giving a duration in the claimed range.
Claim 3: as to the width of the plurality of openings, Tutt describes that exposure of a 10 micron spot can be provided, giving 10 micron lines of patterned metal (note 0088-0090), and since the provided metal pattern corresponds to the openings in the photoresist (note figures 3-4 of Tutt), it is understood that the opening width can be include a minimum width of 10 microns, in the claimed range.
Claim 4: In Tutt, the nanoparticles can be gold or silver, for example (note 0074).
Claim 5: In Tutt, the nanoparticles can be alloys of the metal used, so could be an alloy of gold and silver (note 0074).
Claim 6: As to, further before performing submersion of the wafer, further directing the print head assembly towards a second opening within the plurality of openings, and depositing second nanoparticles, such that a third portion of the second nanoparticles is formed on the layer/substrate and a fourth portion of the second nanoparticles is formed on the uppermost surface of the mask, and the submersion of the wafer further dissolves second portions of the photoresist material in contact with the layer to dislocate the fourth portion of the second nanoparticles and leave the third portion of the nanoparticles to form a second patterned conductive film, this would have been obvious when performing the process of Tutt in view of Kawaguchi and Manzi article, where Tutt provides for multiple openings to be coated with nanoparticles and with resist areas around the openings that are also to be coated with nanoparticles (note figure 3), and as shown by Manzi article the plasma jet printer/print head assembly moves over the substrate surface to coat, with the head providing a jet that covers/is directed at a small area as the head moves (note figures 1-2 and Section III), and therefore as the different openings are to be coated, the print head assembly would move to be directed at the different openings, and second nanoparticles (note the second nanoparticles can be of the same composition as the first nanoparticles, and the second opening would have further new/second nanoparticles to be applied, since the first nanoparticles would have been deposited in the first opening) would deposit over the second opening provide the claimed third portion on the layer and the fourth portion on the surrounding mask/resist area and the fourth portion would be removed as all photoresist would be dissolved, leaving the first and third portions in the desired patterned conductive film form.
Claim 7: In Tutt, after depositing the nanoparticles, the wafer can be not heated prior to performing the submersion (note 0071, 0074-0081, heating occurs after the resist removed, and note the example at 0089).
Claim 8 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tutt in view of Kawaguchi and Manzi article, EITHER alone OR further in view of Lauterbach as applied to claims 1-7 above, and further in view of Tanaka (US 2006/0009020) and Gandhiraman et al (US 2020/0258717).
Claim 8: as to using a shadow mask between the mask and print head assembly, where the mask comprises a second opening aligned with the opening of the plurality of openings in the mask and the shadow mask comprises a conductive or insulator material, Tutt shows the nanoparticles covering the mask and openings (figure 3).
Tanaka shows forming wiring patterns/circuits (note 0002), where photoresist is provided over a substrate and patterned with openings for the desired pattern (note figure 4A, 0039-0041) and ink with nanoparticles is provided into the openings to provide the desired wiring pattern (note figure 4B, 0042-0044). It is indicated that the ink can be applied by an ink jet system (note 0043). It is indicated to provide the ink in the openings and at the edges of the photoresist mask around the openings, but to not apply the ink to unnecessary portions to use materials efficiently.(note figure 4B, 0043). The photoresist is removed, including ink on the resist (note figure 4D, 4E, 0047).
Gandhiraman describes how a plasma jet printer can be provided (note 0091), where the printer head can be provided with a shadow mask 350 that is inserted between the print head assembly and the area to be coated, where mask would be aligned with the area to be coated and limits spray surrounding that area to give a higher precision of coating (note figure 7C, 8A, 8B, 0128-0132), where the shadow mask can be made from a conductive material (metal) or insulator material (dielectric material) (note 0132).
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 Tutt in view of Kawaguchi and Manzi article, EITHER alone OR further in view of Lauterbach to provide using a shadow mask inserted between the mask and print head assembly, where the mask comprises a second opening aligned with the opening of the plurality of openings in the mask and the shadow mask comprises a conductive or insulator material as suggested by Tanaka and Gandhiraman to provide a desirable control of the ink deposition to not cover the entire photoresist mask so as to provide more efficient coating since Tutt wants to apply conductive coating in the openings to form the wiring patten, and Tanaka indicates that in a similar process it is desirable to only provide the ink on the edge of the mask so as to provide more efficient coating, and Gandhiraman describes how it is conventional when using plasma jet printing to provide using a shadow mask between area to be coated and print head assembly, where the mask comprises a second opening aligned with the area to be coated and the shadow mask comprises a conductive or insulator material, and when coating the openings claimed, the shadow mask would be located between the print head assembly and the photoresist mask with the shadow mask opening aligned with the openings to be coated in the mask, as that is the area desired to be coated.
Claims 9-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tutt in view of Kawaguchi and Manzi article, EITHER alone OR further in view of Lauterbach as applied to claims 1-7 above, and further in view of Lauterbach et al (US 2004/0092079) and Shaltry et al (US 2020/0355640).
Claim 9: Tutt in view of Kawaguchi and Manzi article provide the preparing a wafer for deposition with forming a layer above a substrate comprising patterning a mask comprising a photoresist material on the layer where the mask comprises a first opening and a second opening (note figure 2 of Tutt), performing deposition using a plasma jet printer comprising a first module utilized to direct a first ink comprising first nanoparticles towards the first opening and deposit the first nanoparticles on a first portion of the layer/substrate, and performing submersion of the wafer in an aqueous solution and dissolving the photoresist in contact with the layer/substrate to dislocate second portions of the first nanoparticles formed on the mask (note the discussion for claims 1, 6 above).
As to providing the second print head of the plasma jet printer to deposit a second ink comprising second nanoparticles towards the second opening to deposit second nanoparticles on a second portion of the layer, and also the submersion dissolving third portions of the second nanoparticles formed on the mask, Tutt notes forming patterns of conductors, such as wiring/circuit patterns (note 0002, 0082).
Lauterbach note forming circuits (note 0001), where forming metal layers in a desired pattern (note figure 1d, 0055), where it is described that the metal layer can be conductive metal such as gold, silver or a plurality thereof (note 0041), where it is noted that when using the plurality of metals, different regions of the circuit can be coated with different metals (note 0042).
Furthermore, Shaltry describes how printing of conductive inks can be provided over a substrate (note 0006), where the printing can be provided by ink jet printer or plasma jet printer, for example (note 0030), where the printer can be provided with multiple modules/print head such that a first and second module/print head can be provided, where each module is connected to a separate ink, such that different materials can be applied in patterns to different parts of the substrate, for example (note figure 1, 0034-0037).
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 Tutt in view of Kawaguchi and Manzi article to provide that the plasma jet printer has first and second modules, where the first module is used to direct a first ink with first nanoparticles towards the first opening to deposit the first nanoparticles on a first portion of the layer and the second module is used to direct a second ink comprising second nanoparticles towards the second opening and deposit the second nanoparticles on a second portion of the layer, and second portions of the first nanoparticles and third portions of the second nanoparticles are formed on the mask and are removed with the photoresist removal as suggested by Lauterbach and Shaltry with an expectation of forming desirable patterns, since Tutt indicates forming circuits and provides the photoresist with at least first and second openings, and Lauterbach indicates that when forming circuits different portions of the circuit can be provided with different metals, and Shaltry indicts that when plasma jet printing, at least first and second printing modules can be used to deposit different inks to different portions of the substrate, suggesting therefore that to provide the desired portions of the circuits of different materials, to provide that the plasma jet printer has first and second modules, where the first module is used to direct a first ink with first nanoparticles towards the first opening to deposit the first nanoparticles on a first portion of the layer and the second module is used to direct a second ink comprising second nanoparticles towards the second opening and deposit the second nanoparticles on a second portion of the layer, and second portions of the first nanoparticles and third portions of the second nanoparticles are formed on the mask and are removed with the photoresist removal as claimed.
Claim 10: Shaltry would indicate that the first and second modules can be simultaneously operated (note figure 1, where with application shown at the same time, it is expected that they can be simultaneously operated with an expectation of predictably acceptable results).
Claim 11: as shown by Shaltry, the separate modules can form separate patterns (note figure 1), so it is expected that following the process can also form separate patterns.
Claim 12: as to the first and second nanoparticles comprising gold or silver, this would be suggested by Tutt (note 0074) as giving materials to use. Lauterbach also notes gold, silver or platinum (note 0041).
Claims 13, 14: As to further providing third openings and fourth openings, where the first module moves above the third opening and the second module moves above the fourth opening and reperforming the deposition before removing the photoresist, so that the first nanoparticles form a third conductive pattern, and the fourth nanoparticles form a fourth conductive pattern, this would have been an obvious modification based on the desired pattern to be applied, because as shown by Manzi article the plasma jet printer/print head assembly moves over the substrate surface to coat, with the head providing a jet that covers/is directed at a small area as the head moves (note figures 1-2 and Section III), and Shaltry notes how multiple patterns can be desired to be formed (note 0034-0037), and based on the specific pattern desired and different metals for different portions, the specific pattern of openings and movement of the printer modules would be optimized for the specific pattern to be applied. Note MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B), where duplication of part is an obvious modification.
Claim 15: As to the first opening and the second opening separated by a distance of 1-10 microns or more, Tutt notes how pattern gaps of 4 microns can be provided (note 0087), and it further would be expected that any distance larger than that would also be acceptable based on the pattern desired.
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tutt in view of Kawaguchi, Manzi article, Lauterbach and Shaltry as applied to claims 9-15 above, and further in view of Tanaka (US 2006/0009020) and Gandhiraman et al (US 2020/0258717).
Claim 16: Tutt in view of Kawaguchi, Manzi article, Lauterbach and Shaltry as discussed for claim 9 provides all the features of claim 16 except the specific shadow mask use.
As to using a shadow mask between wafer and the printer, where the mask comprises a third opening vertically aligned with the first opening in the photoresist mask and a fourth opening vertically aligned with the second opening in the photoresist mask, Tutt shows the nanoparticles covering the mask and openings (figure 3).
Tanaka shows forming wiring patterns/circuits (note 0002), where photoresist is provided over a substrate and patterned with openings for the desired pattern (note figure 4A, 0039-0041) and ink with nanoparticles is provided into the openings to provide the desired wiring pattern (note figure 4B, 0042-0044). It is indicated that the ink can be applied by an ink jet system (note 0043). It is indicated to provide the ink in the openings and at the edges of the photoresist mask around the openings, but to not apply the ink to unnecessary portions to use materials efficiently (note figure 4B, 0043). The photoresist is removed, including ink on the resist (note figure 4D, 4E, 0047).
Gandhiraman describes how a plasma jet printer can be provided (note 0091), where the printer head can be provided with a shadow mask 350 that is inserted between the print head assembly and the area to be coated, where mask would be vertically aligned with the area to be coated and limits spray surrounding that area to give a higher precision of coating (note figure 7C, 8A, 8B, 0128-0132), where the shadow mask can be made from a conductive material (metal) or insulator material (dielectric material) (note 0132). The mask can have a plurality of openings (note Figure 8B, 9, 0132).
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 Tutt in view of Kawaguchi, Manzi article, Lauterbach and Shaltry to provide using a shadow mask between wafer and the printer, where the mask comprises a third opening vertically aligned with the first opening in the photoresist mask and a fourth opening vertically aligned with the second opening in the photoresist mask as suggested by Tanaka and Gandhiraman to provide a desirable control of the ink deposition to not cover the entire photoresist mask so as to provide more efficient coating since Tutt wants to apply conductive coating in the openings to form the wiring patten, and Tanaka indicates that in a similar process it is desirable to only provide the ink on the edge of the mask so as to provide more efficient coating, and Gandhiraman describes how it is conventional when using plasma jet printing to provide using a shadow mask between area to be coated and print head assembly, where the mask comprises an opening vertically aligned with the area to be coated and where the shadow mask can have multiple openings, and when coating the first and second openings claimed, the shadow mask would be located between the print head assembly/each module and the substrate/wafer with third and fourth shadow mask openings vertically aligned respectively with the first and second openings to be coated in the photoresist mask, as that is the area desired to be coated.
Claim 17: as to the respective sizes of the openings, this would have been a matter of routine optimization for the specific materials to be coated, noting the variations in sizes that can be provided as discussed by Gandhiraman (note 0128), and thus the respective sizes claimed would have been obvious.
Claim 18: as to first nanoparticles entering through the third opening and a seventh portion of the first nanoparticle deposit on the upper surface of the shadow mask and second nanoparticles enter through through the fourth opening and an eighth portion of the second nanoparticles deposit on an upper surface of the shadow mask, it would have been obvious that the first nanoparticles enter through the third opening and the first nanoparticles through the third opening, given the placement of the shadow mask and first and second openings for claim 16. Furthermore as to the first and second nanoparticles depositing on an upper surface of the shadow mask, this would be further expected from Gandhiraman which shows how spray from the printer would impact the upper surface of the shadow masks around the openings (note figure 8A).
Claim 19: as to the first and second openings (in the photoresist mask) separated by a lateral distance of at least one micron, this would be suggested by Tutt, which indicates pattern gaps of 4 microns, for example (note 0087), and since the gaps would correspond to the opening distance (note figures 3-4 of Tutt), this would correspond to the separation of the first and second openings.
Claim 20: as to the first and second nanoparticles comprising gold or silver, this would be suggested by Tutt (note 0074) as giving materials to use. Lauterbach also notes gold, silver or platinum (note 0041).
Chung et al (US 2011/0003086) also notes making patterned coatings of conductive material (note the abstract).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHERINE A BAREFORD whose telephone number is (571)272-1413. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:00 am -3:30 pm, 2nd F 6:00 am -2:30 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, GORDON BALDWIN can be reached at 571-272-5166. 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.
/KATHERINE A BAREFORD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Prosecution Insights