Jump to content

Patent Application 17884455 - SILICON WAFER PREPARATION METHOD OF SILICON - Rejection

From WikiPatents

Patent Application 17884455 - SILICON WAFER PREPARATION METHOD OF SILICON

Title: SILICON WAFER, PREPARATION METHOD OF SILICON WAFER, AND PASSIVATION TREATMENT SOLUTION

Application Information

  • Invention Title: SILICON WAFER, PREPARATION METHOD OF SILICON WAFER, AND PASSIVATION TREATMENT SOLUTION
  • Application Number: 17884455
  • Submission Date: 2025-04-10T00:00:00.000Z
  • Effective Filing Date: 2022-08-09T00:00:00.000Z
  • Filing Date: 2022-08-09T00:00:00.000Z
  • National Class: 428
  • National Sub-Class: 336000
  • Examiner Employee Number: 86958
  • Art Unit: 1713
  • Tech Center: 1700

Rejection Summary

  • 102 Rejections: 1
  • 103 Rejections: 1

Cited Patents

No patents were cited in this rejection.

Office Action Text


    DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 15-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 03/12/2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –

(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.

(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.

Claims 1-4 and 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Li et al (CN 107039241 A, Machine Translation).
As to claim 1, Li discloses a method for preparing a silicon wafer [Abstract], comprising: 
providing a solar silicon ingot [pg. 2, “Background technology”]; 
cutting the solar silicon ingot with a first treatment solution to form a pretreated silicon wafer [claim 1, steps 3-4];
degluing the pretreated silicon wafer with a second treatment solution to obtain a deglued silicon wafer [claim 1, step 5]; and 
cleaning the deglued silicon wafer with a third treatment solution to obtain the silicon wafer [claim 1, “deionized water”]; wherein at least one of the first treatment solution, the second treatment solution, or the third treatment solution comprises a non-metallic compound that is bonded with a silicon ion via a single bond [claim 1, steps 3-4, “ammonium fluoride”].
As to claim 2, Li discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the non-metallic compound comprises at least one of a fluorine-containing compound [claim 1, steps 3-4, “ammonium fluoride”], an iodine-containing compound, a hydrogen-containing compound, a bromine-containing compound, or a cyano-containing compound.
As to claim 3, Li discloses the method according to claim 2, wherein the fluorine-containing compound comprises at least one of potassium fluoride, sodium fluoride, hydrogen fluoride, lithium fluoride, tetramethylammonium fluoride, tetraethylammonium fluoride, or ammonium fluoride [claim 1, steps 3-4, “ammonium fluoride”].
As to claim 4, Li discloses the method according to claim 3, wherein the fluorine-containing compound comprises at least one of potassium fluoride or ammonium fluoride [claim 1, steps 3-4, “ammonium fluoride”].
As to claim 9, Li discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein at least one of the first treatment solution, the second treatment solution, or the third treatment solution comprises the non-metallic compound with a mass ratio of less than or equal to 10% [Example 4, “ammonium fluoride in the etching liquid is 10%”, which anticipates the claimed range as a specific example within the claimed range. See MPEP 2131.03, I.].
As to claim 10, Li discloses the method according to claim 9, wherein at least one of the first treatment solution, the second treatment solution [claim 5, step 5—here, less than 1% is expected to be present], or the third treatment solution [claim 1, “deionized water” —here, only trace amounts are expected to remain after step (5)] comprises the non-metallic compound with a mass ratio of less than or equal to 1%.
As to claim 11, Li discloses the method according to claim 9, wherein the first treatment solution has a conductivity of greater than 20 us/cm [claim 1, steps 3-4; Example 4, here the etching liquid is expected to have a conductivity far in excess of 20 microSiemens/cm].
As to claim 12, Li discloses the method according to claim 11, wherein the first treatment solution has a conductivity of greater than 30 us/cm [claim 1, steps 3-4; Example 4, here the etching liquid is expected to have a conductivity far in excess of 20 microSiemens/cm].
As to claim 13, Li discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising removing impurities from the pretreated silicon wafer prior to degluing [claim 1, steps 3-4, “silicon ingot is completely immersed”].
As to claim 14, Li discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the non-metallic compound is added during cutting [claim 1, steps 3-4].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.

Claims 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (CN 107039241 A, Machine Translation), as applied to claims 1-4 and 9-14 above. 
As to claim 5, Li discloses the method according to claim 2, but fails to explicitly disclose:
wherein the iodine-containing compound comprises at least one of potassium iodide, sodium iodide, tetramethylammonium iodide, tetraethylammonium iodide, ammonium iodide, or p-iodophenol.
However, Li’s teaching of using hydrogen fluoride or ammonium fluoride to capture dissolved metal ions would prompt one of ordinary skill in the art to consider other compounds capable of forming strong bonds with metals via highly electronegative ions. One of ordinary skill in the art would envisage compounds comprising other halogen elements including iodine and bromine, and further other highly electronegative ions, such as cyanide. 
Therefore, it would have been obvious to try other halogen elements or other highly electronegative ions that are effective at forming strong bonds with metals in the cutting solution of Li, in order to achieve the same effect of capturing dissolved metal ions [pg. 2, “Invention content”], with predictable results. 
As to claim 6, modified Li discloses the method according to claim 5, wherein the iodine-containing compound comprises potassium iodide. See rejection of claim 5.
As to claim 7, Li discloses the method according to claim 2, but fails to explicitly disclose:
wherein the bromine-containing compound comprises at least one of hydrogen bromide, potassium bromide, sodium bromide, lithium bromide, or ammonium bromide.
However, Li’s teaching of using hydrogen fluoride or ammonium fluoride to capture dissolved metal ions would prompt one of ordinary skill in the art to consider other compounds capable of forming strong bonds with metals via highly electronegative ions. One of ordinary skill in the art would envisage compounds comprising other halogen elements including iodine and bromine, and further other highly electronegative ions, such as cyanide. 
Therefore, it would have been obvious to try other halogen elements or other highly electronegative ions that are effective at forming strong bonds with metals in the cutting solution of Li, in order to achieve the same effect of capturing dissolved metal ions [pg. 2, “Invention content”], with predictable results. 
As to claim 8, discloses the method according to claim 2, but fails to explicitly disclose: wherein the cyano-containing compound includes at least one of potassium cyanide, sodium cyanide, or ammonium cyanide.
However, Li’s teaching of using hydrogen fluoride or ammonium fluoride to capture dissolved metal ions would prompt one of ordinary skill in the art to consider other compounds capable of forming strong bonds with metals via highly electronegative ions. One of ordinary skill in the art would envisage compounds comprising other halogen elements including iodine and bromine, and further other highly electronegative ions, such as cyanide. 
Therefore, it would have been obvious to try other halogen elements or other highly electronegative ions that are effective at forming strong bonds with metals in the cutting solution of Li, in order to achieve the same effect of capturing dissolved metal ions [pg. 2, “Invention content”], with predictable results. 
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: The additionally cited references are cited to show silicon ingot cutting solutions [Abstracts].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER M REMAVEGE whose telephone number is (571)270-5511. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10:00 AM - 3:30 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, Joshua Allen can be reached on 571-270-3176. 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.





/CHRISTOPHER REMAVEGE/Examiner, Art Unit 1713                                                                                                                                                                                                        


    
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
        
            
    


Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.