J.E.T. CO., LTD.

Patent Trials and Appeals Board

Dec 16, 2020

2020000942 (P.T.A.B. Dec. 16, 2020)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
15/969,236 05/02/2018 Michimasa FUNABASHI 9046/0006PUS2 1839
60601 7590 12/16/2020
Muncy, Geissler, Olds & Lowe, P.C.
4000 Legato Road
Suite 310
Fairfax, VA 22033
EXAMINER
LORENZI, MARC
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
1714
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
12/16/2020 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address(es):
MAILROOM@MG-IP.COM
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________________

Ex parte MICHIMASA FUNABASHI, KENJI OTO KUNI, HIROKI EDO,
and HIDEAKI SUZUKI
____________________

Appeal 2020-000942
Application 15/969,236
Technology Center 1700
____________________

Before JOSEPH L. DIXON, BEVERLY A. FRANKLIN, and
DONNA M. PRAISS, Administrative Patent Judges.

PRAISS, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellant1 appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from a final rejection of
claims 9–15.2 We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We AFFIRM.
The claims are directed to a method for processing a substrate made of
a semiconductor material. According to the Specification, conventional
single-wafer-type process devices supply process liquid from above the

1 We use the word “Appellant” to refer to “applicant(s)” as defined in 37
C.F.R. § 1.42. Appellant identifies the real party in interest as J.E.T. CO.,
LTD. Appeal Br. 2.
2 Claim 16 is canceled based on the claim amendments dated June 25, 2019,
which were entered by the Examiner. Ans. 3–4.
Appeal 2020-000942
Application 15/969,236
2
substrate with the processed surface being directed upwardly. Spec. ¶ 8. The
Specification discloses a solution to process liquid and its vapors, which are
strongly acidic or alkaline, from spilling out to the exterior of the device
housing or adhering to a ceiling surface of a housing, by adhering materials
on a processing surface of the substrate with the processing surface being
directed to a bottom of the housing. Id. ¶¶ 9–13.
Independent claim 9, reproduced below, is illustrative (disputed
limitation italicized).
9. A method for processing a substrate, which is made of
a semiconductor material, having a disk-shape with a single-
wafer-type process device wherein the substrate has two flat
surfaces, and an electronic circuit is to be formed on one of the
flat surfaces, which is determined
as a front surface and the other of the flat surfaces is
determined as a back surface, the process device comprising:
a housing that is formed with:
a bottom wall positioned at a bottom of the housing,
side walls surrounding a periphery of the bottom wall and
extending upward, and
a ceiling placed at top edges of the side walls and having
a circular opening wherein an inner diameter of the opening is
greater than an outer diameter of the substrate;
a heater (13) that is provided at a heating position in
order to heat the substrate wherein the heating position is above
the opening;
a rotating table (2) that is located inside the housing and
below the opening, is configured to rotate around a rotation axis
which extends in a vertical direction at a center of the opening,
and has a through-hole (2a) penetrating the table in the vertical
direction wherein a plurality of dampers (4) are separately
arranged along a periphery of the table in order to hold the
substrate such that the substrate is to be placed maintaining a
Appeal 2020-000942
Application 15/969,236
3
predetermined distance from and in parallel to the upper surface
of the table;
a cylinder member (5) that has a hollow therein and is
fixed to a lower surface of the table;
a process liquid pipe (8) that is configured to supply
process liquid, is arranged inside the cylinder member, and of
which a leading opening is fixed in the vicinity of the through-
hole such that the process liquid supplied through the process
liquid pipe is discharged upward wherein the process liquid is
used to process the front surface by eliminating either a resist
film or a nitride film, which is disposed on the front surface of
the substrate, therefrom;
a water pipe (9) that is configured to supply pure water,
is arranged inside the cylinder member, and of which a leading
opening is fixed in the vicinity of the through-hole such that the
pure water supplied through the water pipe is discharged
upward wherein the pure water is used to rinse the front surface
of the substrate to which the process liquid is supplied;
two guide members (l8a-l8c) that are in a conic shape,
and are arranged in the housing wherein:
a tip portion of the conic shape is truncated such that a
circular guide opening is formed at a truncated peripheral
wherein the circular guide opening faces upward, a center of the
circular guide opening is coaxial to the rotation axis and a
diameter of the circular guide opening is greater than the outer
diameter of the substrate,
a skirt portion of the conic shape corresponds to an inner
shape of the side walls such that the skirt portion is fixed to the
side walls wherein a boundary between the skirt portion and the
side walls is sealed,
one of the guide members, which is positioned above the
other of the guide members, being defined as a first guide
member and the other of the guide members, which is
positioned below the first guide member, being defined as a
second guide member;
an outlet (1d, le) that links an inside of the housing to an
outside of the housing, is arranged at a portion of the side walls
Appeal 2020-000942
Application 15/969,236
4
wherein the portion is located between the skirts of the first and
second guide members in the vertical direction; and
a pump (12a, 12b) that is connected to the outlet and
performs a suction of vapors existing inside the housing in
order to evacuate the vapors through the outlet,
the method, comprising:
• retrieving the heater from the heating position to a
retrieving position that is farther to the substrate than at the
heating position in order not to heat the substrate;
• placing the substrate over the table with the dampers
wherein the front surface of the substrate is arranged downward
in order to face the process liquid pipe and the water pipe so
that either the resist film or the nitride film, which is disposed
on the front surface of the substrate, is eliminated by the
process liquid,
• positioning the substrate at the same height as the
circular guide opening of the first guide member such that a gap
between the substrate and the circular guide opening is created,
• rotating the rotation table,
• activating the pump to work in order to generate an
airflow that comes inside the housing from the opening of the
ceiling, passing through the gap and reaching the outlet,
• after activating the pump to work, supplying the process
liquid to the front surface of the substrate while the pump
works,
• returning the heater at the heating position and heating
the substrate while the process liquid is supplied, and
• supplying the pure water to the front surface of the
substrate from the water pipe (9).
Appeal Br. 21–23 (Claims Appendix). Claim 13 depends from claim 9
and recites “the another water pipe is a solo pipe for supplying liquid
on the back surface of the substrate such that no process liquid is
supplied on the back surface.” Id. at 24.
Appeal 2020-000942
Application 15/969,236
5
REFERENCES
The prior art relied upon by the Examiner in rejecting the claims on
appeal is:
Name Reference Date
Toshima US 2002/0096196 A1 July 25, 2002
Yokouchi US 2004/0084144 A1 May 6, 2004
Kawaguchi US 2010/0258142 A1 Oct. 14, 2010
REJECTIONS
The Examiner maintains (Ans. 3) the following rejections:
Claim(s) 35 U.S.C. § Reference(s)
9–15 112, 2nd paragraph
9–15 103(a) Toshima, Yokouchi, Kawaguchi

ANALYSIS
Indefiniteness Rejection
Appellant does not present arguments in the Appeal Brief challenging
the Examiner’s rejection of claims 9–15 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, 2nd
paragraph for omitting an essential step. Final Act. 5; Appeal Br. generally;
Ans. 4. In the Reply Brief, Appellant states that the claim language “in order
to heat” is less important than other elements of independent claim 9,
therefore the phrase or the entire step will be eliminated if prosecution
continues. Reply Br. 2. Accordingly, we summarily affirm the rejection of
claims 9–15 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, 2nd paragraph because Appellant has not
set forth a persuasive argument.
Obviousness Rejection
Appellant separately argues claims 9 and 13 and groups dependent
claims 10–12, 14, and 15 with claim 9. Appeal Br. 15–19. In accordance
with 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(iv), claims 10–12 will stand or fall together
Appeal 2020-000942
Application 15/969,236
6
with independent claim 1 from which they depend and claims 14 and 15 will
stand or fall together with claim 13 from which they depend. We address
claims 9 and 13 below.
Independent Claim 9
Appellant contends the Examiner erred in rejecting claim 9 because
“Toshima fails to teach or suggest an arrangement of wafer of which the
front surface faces downward in order to achieve the same advantages as the
present invention has.” Appeal Br. 15–16. Appellant acknowledges that
Toshima discloses both sides of wafer W are washed off and cleaned with
various types of liquid. Id. at 15. Appellant argues, however, that “Toshima
does not intend to process the back surface for fabricating any devices.” Id.
at 16 (citing Toshima ¶ 7). Appellant contends a resist film would be
expected to be disposed only on Toshima’s front surface, thus, Toshima fails
to disclose eliminating these films from a downward facing surface. Id.
Appellant contends that Yokouchi does not cure the deficiencies of Toshima
because Yokouchi discloses removing an unwanted portion of thin form
from a back surface only when needed. Id. at 17 (citing Yokouchi ¶ 4).
In the Reply Brief, Appellant acknowledges that claim 9 “does not
recite that the front surface is the solo surface to be chemically processed or
the back surface is not chemically processed.” Reply Br. 3. According to
Appellant, the claim may be amended if prosecution is continued. Id.
Appellant’s arguments do not persuade us of error in the Examiner’s
rejection for the reasons provided by the Examiner in the Final Office
Action and the Answer. As Appellant appreciates, the cited prior art
references disclose or suggest processing both sides of a substrate, therefore,
the claim limitation referring to the downward facing side of the substrate
specifically is insufficient to distinguish the prior art combination on which
Appeal 2020-000942
Application 15/969,236
7
the rejection is based. Limitations not appearing in the claims cannot be
relied upon for patentability. In re Self, 671 F.2d 1344, 1348 (CCPA 1982).
For the above reasons, and those provided in the Final Office Action
and the Answer, we sustain the Examiner’s § 103(a) rejection of
independent claim 9. We also sustain the Examiner’s § 103(a) rejection of
dependent claims 10–12, argued for their dependency from claim 9. Appeal
Br. 18.

Dependent Claim 13
In the Appeal Brief, Appellant additionally argues that the Examiner
erred in finding that Toshima teaches a solo pipe. Appeal Br. 19. Appellant
contends Toshima merely discloses a solo nozzle that is designed to feed not
only pure water, but chemical liquid as well. Id. Appellant notes that because
the claimed invention requires that the substrate face downward, there is no
thin film to eliminate over the upper surface requiring chemical liquid to be
supplied to the upper surface. Id.
Appellant’s argument is not persuasive of error because Toshima’s
nozzle is capable of supplying liquid that is not process liquid on the back
surface as the Examiner finds. Ans. 6; Toshima 102. Thus, Appellant has not
shown error in the Examiner’s rejection of dependent claim 13.
For the above reasons and those provided in the Final Office Action
and the Answer, we sustain the Examiner’s § 103(a) rejection of dependent
claim 13. We also sustain the Examiner’s § 103(a) rejection of dependent
claims 14 and 15, argued for their dependency. Appeal Br. 18.

CONCLUSION
The Examiner did not err in rejecting claims 9–15.
Appeal 2020-000942
Application 15/969,236
8

DECISION
For the above reasons, we AFFIRM the Examiner’s rejection of
claims 9–15.
In summary:
Claim(s)
Rejected 35 U.S.C. §  Reference(s) Affirmed Reversed
9–15 112, 2
nd
paragraph  9–15
9–15 103(a)
Toshima,
Yokouchi,
Kawaguchi
9–15
Overall
Outcome 9–15
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv).

AFFIRMED