Ex Parte Azuma et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jan 23, 2013

10555451 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 23, 2013)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________________

Ex parte MASAYUKI AZUMA and YASUYUKI SAKAYA
____________________

Appeal 2011-000264
Application 10/555,451
Technology Center 3700
____________________

Before: LINDA E. HORNER, JOHN W. MORRISON, and SCOTT E.
KAMHOLZ, Administrative Patent Judges.

MORRISON, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

Appeal 2011-000264
Application 10/555,451
2
STATEMENT OF CASE
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from a rejection of claims 1-
4. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). An oral hearing was held on
January 10, 1013.
We reverse.
THE INVENTION
The claims are directed to a laser dicing device. Claim 1, reproduced
below, is illustrative of the claimed subject matter:
1. A laser dicing apparatus making laser light, of which
condensing point is arranged to the inside of a wafer, incident
through the surface of said wafer while scanning the laser light,
and dicing said wafer by forming a modified region inside said
wafer to divide said wafer into individual chips, said laser
dicing apparatus comprising:
a first position detecting device detecting a position in the
thickness direction of the surface of said wafer at the incident
point of said laser light;
a second position detecting device provided separately
from the first position detecting device, and detecting in
advance a position in the thickness direction of the surface of
said wafer;
a memory in which position data of the coordinates of the
position in the thickness direction of the surface of said wafer
obtained by said second position detecting device is stored; and
a control section controlling the position in the thickness
direction of said condensing position inside said wafer,
wherein the control section, when scanning said laser
light from the outside of a periphery of the wafer to the inside
of the periphery of the wafer, performs control based on
position data in the thickness direction of the surface of the
wafer obtained with said second position detecting device
recalled from said memory, and after scanning a predetermined
distance, switches to perform control based on position data in
the thickness direction of the surface of the wafer obtained by
said first position detecting device.
Appeal 2011-000264
Application 10/555,451
3
REFERENCES
The prior art relied upon by the Examiner in rejecting the claims on
appeal is:
Sekiya
O'Brien
Fukuyo
US 2002/0005958 A1
US 2002/0190435 A1
US 2004/0002199 A1
Jan. 17, 2002
Dec. 19, 2002
Jan. 1, 2004

REJECTION
Claims 1-4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Fukuyo, O'Brien, and Sekiya.

ANALYSIS
Addressing claims 1-4, the Examiner determines that “[i]t would have
been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to
use the detectors of O'Brien et al. and Sekiya in conjunction with [the laser
beam machining device of] Fukuyo et al. because these are specific devices
which are used for thickness and positioning measurements.” Ans. 11.
Appellants counter that “the Examiner has failed to identify the use of two
differen[t] control techniques and switching of one to the other based upon
the distance scanned ‘from the outside of a periphery of the wafer to the
inside of the periphery of the wafer.’” App. Br. 4.
The Examiner responds that
one, the second detection (S103) is the amount of movement in
the Z axis direction (that is a position in thickness direction in
advance) is determined. This amount of movement is fed into
the overall controller (127) (¶0288). Two: the first detection
(S107) then calculates the focal point at the surface of the
object (that is movement in the Z axis).
Ans. 16.
Appeal 2011-000264
Application 10/555,451
4
It appears that the control related to the first detection S103 and S107
occurs separately in the steps S111 and S109 respectively. See Fukyuo, Fig.
15. It should be noted that steps S103, S107, S109, and S111 are only
concerned with detections or movement in the z-direction about a point of
the wafer.
The Examiner makes no finding on which to support a determination
of obviousness of a control section “when scanning said laser light from the
outside of a periphery of the wafer to the inside of the periphery of the
wafer, performs control based on position data in the thickness direction of
the surface of the wafer obtained with said second position detecting device
recalled from said memory” as required by claim 1. All of the control
related to S103 and S107 are performed in the z axis, and as such do not
describe any scanning from the “outside of a periphery of the wafer” to the
“inside of the periphery of the wafer” as claimed.
We agree with Appellants that the Examiner has not established by a
preponderance of the evidence that the proposed combination of prior art
teaches the claimed control section as set forth above. Accordingly, we
cannot sustain the rejection of claim 1 or the rejection of dependent claims
2-4, which depend therefrom.
DECISION
For the above reasons, the Examiner’s rejection of claims 1-4 is
reversed.
REVERSED

hh