Ex Parte Kimura

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Sep 17, 2008

10150966 (B.P.A.I. Sep. 17, 2008)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________

Ex parte MASAHIRO KIMURA
__________

Appeal 2008-3597
Application 10/150,966
Technology Center 1700
___________

Decided: September 17, 2008
___________

Before ADRIENE LEPIANE HANLON, THOMAS A. WALTZ, and
CAROL A. SPIEGEL, Administrative Patent Judges.

HANLON, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

A. STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from an Examiner’s final
rejection of claims 1, 2, and 4-7, all of the claims pending in the application.
We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We AFFIRM.
Appeal 2008-3597
Application 10/150,966

The Examiner finally rejected claims 1, 2, and 4-7 under 35 U.S.C. §
102(b) as anticipated by Muraoka,1 Mohindra,2 Schwenkler,3 or Shimizu.4
Final 2-3.5
B. ISSUE
Whether the Appellant has shown that the Examiner reversibly erred
in rejecting claims 1, 2, and 4-7 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by
Muraoka, Mohindra, Schwenkler, or Shimizu.
C. FINDINGS OF FACT
The following findings of fact (FF) are supported by a preponderance
of the evidence. Additional findings of fact as necessary appear in the
Analysis portion of the opinion.
1. Claimed subject matter
The claimed subject matter relates to a substrate drying apparatus.
Claims 1 and 2 are the only independent claims on appeal.
Claim 1 is representative of the issue on appeal, and it reads as
follows:
1. A substrate processing apparatus drying a substrate
after cleaning said substrate with a fluid, comprising:
a processing bath storing a liquid for immersing said
substrate in said liquid and cleaning said substrate;
a holding device structured to hold said substrate in said
processing bath;
a discharge device discharging said liquid stored in said
processing bath while said holding device holds said substrate

1 US 5,826,601 issued to Muraoka et al. on October 27, 1998 (“Muraoka”).
2 US 5,571,337 issued to Mohindra et al. on November 5, 1996
(“Mohindra”).
3 US 5,752,532 issued to Schwenkler on May 19, 1998 (“Schwenkler”).
4 US 6,043,162 issued to Shimizu et al. on March 28, 2000 (“Shimizu”).
5 Final Office Action mailed August 25, 2006.
2
Appeal 2008-3597
Application 10/150,966

in said processing bath and inert gas is introduced into said
processing bath;
a first introduction device structured and controlled to
introduce inert gas into said processing bath while said
discharge device discharges said liquid stored in said
processing bath to expose at least part of a surface of said
substrate, said liquid being replaced by said inert gas on an
exposed surface of said substrate; and
a second introduction device structured and controlled to,
after introducing said inert gas by said first introduction device,
introduce an organic solvent into said processing bath while
said holding device holds said substrate in said processing bath
from which said liquid has been discharged by said discharge
device.

App. Br. 8,6 Claims Appendix.
According to claim 5, the organic solvent is isopropyl alcohol vapor.
App. Br. 9, Claims Appendix.
2. Mohindra
1. Mohindra discloses a method and apparatus for rinsing and drying a
substrate. Mohindra 1:12-21.

6 Second Amended Appeal Brief dated July 23, 2007.
3
Appeal 2008-3597
Application 10/150,966

2. An embodiment of the rinse/dry chamber is illustrated in Figure 3.
Mohindra 6:53-55. Mohindra Figure 3 is reproduced below:

Figure 3 depicts a rinse/dry chamber.
3. Embodiment 200 includes a main chamber 210, a process region 240,
a lower drain region 231, and a cascade drain region 250. Mohindra
6:55-59.
4. The process region 240 includes a wafer carrier 242. Mohindra 7:6-7.
5. The main chamber 210 includes a gas inlet 230 having at least a
carrier gas inlet and a solvent gas inlet. Mohindra 7:2-3.
6. The gas inlet may comprise two outside carrier gas inlets 302 and 306,
and a center solvent gas inlet 304. Each of the gas inlets is a
4
Appeal 2008-3597
Application 10/150,966

distribution plenum with a plurality of holes for distributing gas
evenly over the process region. Mohindra 8:54-59; Figure 4.
7. According to the method disclosed in Mohindra, an etched wafer is
immersed in a bath of deionized water. Mohindra 9:10-12.
8. To remove acid, such as HF, from the surface of the wafer, the
deionized water in the main chamber flows across the wafer and
cascades over into a drain. The deionized water cascade carries
excess acid into the drain and reduces the acid concentration in the
vessel. Mohindra 9:22-26.
9. Optionally, the deionized water in the vessel may be removed by
dumping it into a bottom drain dump. Preferably, the dumping step is
a partial dump, and not a complete dump or removal of deionized
water. During the removal of deionized water, a clean inert gas, e.g.,
filtered nitrogen, displaces the deionized water. Mohindra 9:27-32.
10. After displacing the deionized water with the inert gas, clean
deionized water from the deionized water source flows into the main
chamber to cover the surface area of the wafer. Mohindra 9:33-35.
11. When residual acid has been substantially removed from the wafer, a
carrier gas including a polar organic compound displaces the
deionized water. The carrier gas is preferably nitrogen with a trace of
polar organic compound such as isopropyl alcohol. Mohindra 9:39-
44.
3. Schwenkler
12. Schwenkler discloses a substrate cleaner and dryer as well as a
method of drying a substrate using an isopropyl alcohol (IPA) vapor
in the disclosed apparatus. Schwenkler 1:14-18.
5
Appeal 2008-3597
Application 10/150,966

13. An embodiment of the apparatus is illustrated in Figure 5.
Schwenkler 5:44-45. Schwenkler Figure 5 is reproduced below:

Figure 5 depicts a clean/dry apparatus.
14. The apparatus includes a process vessel 100 that may function as a
rinsing vessel, a cleaning vessel, and/or a drying vessel. Schwenkler
6:27-29.
15. According to the disclosed process, process vessel 100 is filled with
deionized water introduced through valved portal 102. Schwenkler
8:9-11.
16. The product to be rinsed and dried is placed into process vessel 100.
Schwenkler 8:12-13.
17. Overflow rinsing begins with water exiting through valved portal 103.
Schwenkler 8:14-16.
6
Appeal 2008-3597
Application 10/150,966

18. When the rinsing is complete, water is drained from process vessel
100 through portal 210 by opening main drain valve 104 and water
drain valve 106. Inert gas, typically N2, is introduced through portal
202 by opening gas storage vessel valve 136 which allows pressurized
inert gas from inert gas storage 20 to backfill process vessel 100 as the
water drains. Schwenkler 8:30-37.
19. When the water level in process vessel 100 is empty, gas storage
vessel valve 136 and water drain valve 106 are shut. Schwenkler
8:42-46.
20. Process gas recirculation is then initiated. Recirculation includes
saturating the process gas with IPA vapor as it passes through vapor
generator 126. The IPA saturated process gas enters the process
vessel 100 via portal 208. Schwenkler 8:50-61.
4. Muraoka
21. Muraoka discloses a substrate treating apparatus and a method for
treating a substrate in the disclosed apparatus. Muraoka 1:6-16.

7
Appeal 2008-3597
Application 10/150,966

22. One embodiment of the apparatus is illustrated in Figure 10. Muraoka
7:57-58. Muraoka Figure 10 is reproduced below:

Figure 10 depicts a substrate treating apparatus.
23. A treating bath 1 is mounted in a closed chamber 30. Muraoka 14:48-
50.
24. A wafer W, supported by a wafer holder (not shown), is treated in the
treating bath 1. Muraoka 8:15-17.
25. The treating bath 1 includes an overflow passage 3 that allows treating
liquids to flow into and out of the treating bath 1. Muraoka 8:20-22.
26. The overflow passage 3 guides a treating liquid overflowing the
treating bath 1 into a pipe 5 through bores 3a. The overflow passage
3 also receives a treating liquid from the pipe 5 through bores 3a, and
allows this treating liquid to flow into the treating bath 1. Muraoka
8:25-29.
8
Appeal 2008-3597
Application 10/150,966

27. The treating bath 1 further includes a drain/supply pipe 4. Muraoka
8:22-24.
28. The drain/supply pipe 4 connected to the bottom of the treating bath 1
receives a treating liquid drawn from the treating bath 1 through a
plurality of bores 4a, and allows the treating liquid to flow into a pipe
14. The drain/supply pipe 4 also allows a treating liquid to be
supplied from the pipe 14 into the treating bath 1 through bores 4a.
Muraoka 8:62-67.
29. The apparatus includes an inert gas source 34. A pipe 32 extends into
the closed chamber 30 for supplying the inert gas. The pipe 32 has a
switch valve 33 operable to supply the inert gas from the inert gas
source 34 to the closed chamber 30. Muraoka 14:61-64.
30. The apparatus also includes an IPA (isopropyl alcohol) supply line
having a switch valve 43 operable to supply IPA from an IPA source
44 to the closed chamber 30. Muraoka 17:40-43.
31. According to the treating process disclosed in Muraoka, chamber 30 is
filled with an inert gas, e.g., nitrogen gas. Muraoka 15:19-23.
32. After the chamber 30 is purged with the inert gas, wafer treatment is
performed using a recipe of different chemicals. Muraoka 15:24-27,
17:46-48.
33. Wafer treatment includes supplying a chemical or deionized water
continuously to the top of the treating bath 1 while deionized water or
the chemical, respectively, is discharged from the bottom thereof.
Muraoka 11:24-12:40, 15:28-30.
34. When wafer treatment is complete, the switch valve 33 is closed to
stop the inert gas supply. Muraoka 16:4-6.
9
Appeal 2008-3597
Application 10/150,966

35. The process continues with opening the switch valve 43 to supply IPA
into the closed chamber 30. Muraoka 17:55-56; Figure 11.
36. The wafer W is raised from the deionized water in the treating bath 1
and stopped in a position to be dried. Muraoka 17:56-60.
5. Shimizu
37. Shimizu discloses a method for processing a substrate. Shimizu 1:7-9.
38. Figure 1 illustrates an apparatus that embodies the disclosed method.
Shimizu 2:53-54. Shimizu Figure 1 is reproduced below:

Figure 1 depicts a vapor etching apparatus.
39. The disclosed apparatus comprises a reaction chamber 7, a support
boat 4 on which a plurality of semiconductor wafers 14 are vertically
stacked, an injector means 5, a drainage port 10 for discharging pure
water used for cleaning, and an exhaust port 9 for discharging etching
gases and a drying gas. Shimizu 2:60-3:12.
10
Appeal 2008-3597
Application 10/150,966

40. The injector means 5 is connected to an external pure water tank, a
reactive gas tank, an alcoholic gas tank, and an inert gas tank through
a port 8. Shimizu 3:22-24.
41. Shimizu discloses that a plurality of injector means may be provided
in the reaction chamber. Shimizu 3:28-30.
42. The disclosed method comprises the steps of loading semiconductor
wafers into the reaction chamber, evacuating the reaction chamber to
about 1 Pa, etching the wafers by introducing an etching gas, restoring
the pressure in the reaction chamber to atmospheric pressure while
introducing an inert gas to purge the reactive gas, cleaning the wafers
while rotating the same, drying the wafers by rotating the same in a
flow of inert gas, drying the inner wall surface of the reaction
chamber by introducing an alcoholic gas therein, and removing the
wafers from the reaction chamber. Shimizu 4:10-22.
D. ANALYSIS
Claim 1 recites an apparatus comprising first and second introduction
devices “structured and controlled” to perform particular functions.
The Examiner found that Muraoka, Mohindra, Schwenkler, and
Shimizu disclose introduction devices that are physically capable of
operating in many controlled/programmed scenarios, including the scenario
recited in claim 1. Thus, the Examiner found that Muraoka, Mohindra,
Schwenkler, and Shimizu each disclose an apparatus within the scope of the
claims on appeal. Ans. 5-6.7

7 Examiner’s Answer mailed October 4, 2007.
11
Appeal 2008-3597
Application 10/150,966

The Appellant argues that the Examiner incorrectly interpreted claim
1 as reciting first and second introduction devices having some
“controllable” structure. App. Br. 4-5. In contrast, the Appellant argues:
[T]he recitation that the first introduction device is structured
and controlled to introduce inert gas into a processing [bath]
while the discharge device discharges a liquid stored in the
processing bath, is clearly a recitation of the physical attributes
of the structure itself, and is recognizable structure as such to
one of ordinary skill in the art. Similarly, the second
introduction device that is structured and controlled to
introduce an organic solvent into the processing bed after
introduction of the inert gas by the first introduction device is
also a description of the physical properties of the device to one
of ordinary skill in the art.

App. Br. 5.
To the extent that the first and second introduction devices recited in
claim 1 require more than some “controllable” structure to perform the
recited functions, we find that the prior art describes first and second
introduction devices within the scope of claim 1. For example, Mohindra
describes “a first introduction device structured and controlled to introduce
inert gas into said processing bath while said discharge device discharges
said liquid stored in said processing bath” and “a second introduction device
structured and controlled to, after introducing said inert gas by said first
introduction device, introduce an organic solvent into said processing bath.”
See, e.g., FF 9-11.
The Appellant also argues that the claimed apparatus is patentably
distinct from the apparatuses of the prior art because the structure of the
prior art does not provide the liquid/inert gas/organic solvent sequence of the
claimed apparatus. App. Br. 5-6. In particular, the Appellant argues that the
12
Appeal 2008-3597
Application 10/150,966

“second introduction device” recited in the claims on appeal executes the
process of replacing an inert gas with an organic solvent on a substrate
surface. App. Br. 6.
According to claim 1, the second introduction device is structured and
controlled to introduce an organic solvent into the processing bath after the
inert gas has been introduced by the first introduction device. Claim 1 does
not exclude the introduction of other liquids, such as deionized water, into
the processing bath after the inert gas has been introduced but before an
organic solvent is introduced. That is, claim 1 does not require an organic
solvent to replace the inert gas. In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321 (Fed. Cir.
1989) (during patent examination pending claims must be interpreted as
broadly as their terms reasonably allow).
Finally, the Appellant argues that each of the cited references only
discloses one “control element” whereas the claims on appeal require two
“control elements.” App. Br. 6.
Although both of the introduction devices must be “controlled” to
perform a particular function, the claims on appeal do not require the first
and second introduction devices to be controlled by separate controllers. See
Ans. 7 (the claims are silent with respect to the limitation of “two control
elements”).
For the reasons set forth above, the Appellant has failed to show that
claims 1, 2, and 4-7 were improperly rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by Muraoka, Mohindra, Schwenkler, or Shimizu.
E. DECISION
The rejection of claims 1, 2, and 4-7 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by Muraoka, Mohindra, Schwenkler, or Shimizu is affirmed.
13
Appeal 2008-3597
Application 10/150,966

No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 35 U.S.C. § 1.136(a) (2008).

AFFIRMED

rvb

OSTROLENK FABER GERB & SOFFEN
1180 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036-8403

14