14635729 - (D) (P.T.A.B. Jun. 19, 2019)

Ex Parte SCHRODER et al

Patent Trials and Appeals BoardJun 19, 2019

14635729 - (D) (P.T.A.B. Jun. 19, 2019)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE 14/635,729 03/02/2015 124676 7590 06/21/2019 Russell Ng PLLC 8729 Shoal Creek Blvd., Suite 100 Austin, TX 78757 FIRST NAMED INVENTOR KURT A. SCHRODER 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 ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. NCC.001008B 7205 EXAMINER ISAAC, STANETTAD ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2898 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 06/21/2019 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): s tephanie@russellnglaw.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte KURT A. SCHRODER and ROBERT P. WENZ Appeal2018-005841 Application 14/635,729 Technology Center 2800 Before MICHAEL P. COLAIANNI, GEORGIANNA W. BRADEN, and MERRELL C. CASHION, JR., Administrative Patent Judges. COLAIANNI, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appeal2018-005841 Application 14/635,729 Appellants1 appeal under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 134 from the final rejection of claims 1-7. We have jurisdiction over the appeal pursuant to 35 U.S.C. Â§ 6(b ). We REVERSE. Appellants' invention is directed to a method for thermally processing films on low-temperature substrates (Spec. 2:13-14; claim 1). Claim 1 is illustrative of the subject matter claimed: 1. A method for thermally processing a very thin film, said method comprising: patterning a metal absorbing trace located adjacent to a very thin film that is located on top of a substrate; after said patterning, irradiating said metal absorbing trace with at least one electromagnetic pulse to heat up said metal absorbing trace, wherein a pulse length of said at least one electromagnetic pulse is shorter than a thermal equilibration time of said substrate; and after said irradiating, allowing heat from said metal absorbing trace to thermally process said very thin film. Appellants appeal the following rejections: 1. Claims 1, 3, 6, and 7 stand rejected by the Examiner under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Dunn (US 5,757,016; May 26, 1998) in view ofHarmala (US 2010/0170566 Al; July 8, 2010). 2. Claim 2 stands rejected by the Examiner under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Dunn in view of Harmala and Grant (US 2007/0037346 Al; February 15, 2007). 1 The Appeal Brief identifies "Novacentrix Corporation" as the real party in interest. App. Br. 3. 2 Appeal2018-005841 Application 14/635,729 3. Claims 4 and 5 stand rejected by the Examiner under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Dunn in view ofHarmala and Kakkad (US 2009/0042343 Al; February 12, 2009). FINDINGS OF FACT & ANALYSIS The Examiner's findings and conclusions regarding Dunn and Harmala are located on pages 2 to 3 of the Final Office Action. Appellants argue that the heat in Dunn's process comes from the flashlamp to ablate the coating or surface of the substrate and not from the absorbing metal trace to thermally process the very thin film as required by claim 1 (App. Br. 5; Reply Br. 3). Appellants contend Dunn's ablation process uses the flashlamp to pattern selectively the coating such that the generated heat stays in the coating during the short time increments of the pattern ablation process (Reply Br. 3). We agree. The Examiner finds that Dunn's shaped aluminum coating on the mask layer 18 corresponds to the claimed patterning process that forms a metal trace (Final Act. 2-3). Citing to Dunn's column 5, lines 7-35 and column 12, lines 6-25, the Examiner finds that Dunn discloses forming patterns by an ablation process where the short pulse light source is applied to the shaped coating in which the absorption of high density energy is concentrated in the coating thereby forming patterns 13 (Final Act. 3). The Examiner does not rely on Harmala to teach forming a metal trace layer or irradiating the metal trace to treat thermally an underlying layer (Final Act. 3-4). Rather, the Examiner relies on Harmala to teach a rapid thermal annealing step that does not affect the polymer substrate (Final Act. 3). 3 Appeal2018-005841 Application 14/635,729 The patterned aluminum layer disclosed in Dunn's column 7, lines 52-57 is part of the mask layer 18. Dunn discloses that the mask is made of base material with high transparency to the radiation of the flashlamp (col. 7, 11. 41-42). Dunn further discloses that the high transparency of the mask minimizes distortion and diffraction of radiation passing through the mask and minimizes heating of the mask due to absorption of radiation ( co 1. 7, 11. 4 3-4 7). Dunn discloses that the mask 18 may include a highly reflective surface coating to minimize etching of the mask and minimize heating of the mask by the flashlamp ( col. 7, 11. 48-51 ). Dunn then discloses that the surface coating of the mask may be aluminum ( col. 7, 11. 53-55). These disclosures from Dunn indicate that the Examiner reversibly erred in finding that Dunn's patterned aluminum layer corresponds to the metal trace in the claim. The claimed method requires a step of irradiating the metal trace with an electromagnetic pulse to heat up the metal absorbing trace ( claim 1 ). In light of Dunn's teaching that the aluminum layer is reflective so as to minimize heating of the mask, the Examiner has not established that Dunn teaches patterning a metal absorbing trace located adjacent a very thin film as required by claim 1. The Examiner finds that Dunn at column 5, lines 6-22 teaches a well- known ablative decomposition process that is used to pattern selectively the coating on workpiece 14 to form patterns 13 (Ans. 5). Dunn's column 5 disclosure, however, relates to the coating on the surface of the workpiece absorbing the flashlamp short pulse width (i.e., "[ a ]bsorption of short pulse width ... generate[ s] a substantial amount of heat in the coating or boundary portion ... ") (Dunn, col. 5, 11. 12-17 (emphasis added)). Dunn 4 Appeal2018-005841 Application 14/635,729 does not disclose that the aluminum coated mask layer 18 absorbs the short pulse. In fact, Dunn teaches the opposite as noted above. Because the Examiner has not established that the prior art teaches or would have suggested all the limitations of claim 1, we reverse the Examiner'sÂ§ 103(a) rejection of Dunn in view of Harmala. The Examiner does not rely on Grant or Kakkad to teach the limitation of heating up a metal trace and using that heat to thermally treat an underlying layer (Final Act. 4-5). Therefore, on this record, we also reverse the Examiner's Â§ 103(a) rejection over Dunn in view of Harmala and Grant, and theÂ§ 103(a) rejection over Dunn in view of Harmala and Kakkad. DECISION The Examiner's decision is reversed. REVERSED 5