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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 9, 18, 19, and 20 have been amended. Claims 1-20 have been examined on the merits.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 7, filed 11/14/2025, with respect to the amendments to
the claim objections are persuasive. The claim objections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 7-8, filed 11/14/2025, with respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 103 have been considered but are moot because the claims have been amended and the new grounds of rejection do not rely on the reference or combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 1, 3, 5, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over George et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,948,034 B2) and KOBAYASHI (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0318954 A1).
Referring to claim 1: George et al. teaches a semiconductor substrate carrier frame (24 Fig. 17A; “FIG. 17A is a top perspective view of the wafer carrier fixture;” Col. 4, lines 35-36), comprising: a frame body (280 Figs. 17A and 17B) defining a central aperture (central aperture of 280 shown in Fig. 17A) through a thickness (thickness of 280 shown in Figs. 17A and 17B) of the frame body (280 Figs. 17A and 17B), wherein: the frame body forms an entire periphery (entire periphery of 280 shown in Fig. 17A) of the central aperture (central aperture of 280 shown in Fig. 17A); and a plurality of fingers (286 Fig. 17B) that are coupled with the frame body (280 Figs. 17A and 17B), each of the plurality of fingers extend from the frame body (280 Figs. 17A and 17B) toward (“For the bonding process the aligned wafers 410, 420 are placed in the carrier fixture 24 and are spaced apart with spacers 284 and then clamped down with clamps 286” Col. 7 , lines 43-46) a center of the central aperture (central aperture of 280 shown in Fig. 17A) an inner surface (inner surface of 280 shown in Fig. 17A) of the frame body facing the central aperture (central aperture of 280 shown in Fig. 17A),
wherein: each of the plurality of fingers (286 Fig. 17B) comprises a substrate receiving interface (SRI substrate receiving interface which makes physical contact with substrate shown in Fig. 1-A inserted below); at least one of the plurality of fingers (286 Fig. 17B) comprises an actuator (“Each spacer 284 and each clamp 286 are independently activated by linear actuators 283 and 285, respectively.” Col. 7, lines 40-43) that manipulates a respective one of the at least one of the plurality of fingers (286 Fig. 17B) between a substrate holding position and an open position (“clamp is clamped down to lock the position of the two wafers” Col. 7, lines 40-41).
But is silent on each of the plurality of fingers specifically extend from an inner surface of the frame body.
KOBAYASHI in an analogous semiconductor substrate carrier frame (1 Figs. 2 and 6) and teaches wherein each of the similar configuration plurality of fingers (42 Figs. 2 and 6) specifically extend from an inner surface (inner surface of 15/16 which accommodates 42 shown in Fig. 2) of the similar configuration frame body (15 and 16 Figs. 2 and 6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the substrate carrier frame of George et al. with the finger placement as taught by KOBAYASHI for the purpose of having an alternate configuration which houses the moving parts for general protection while giving them ample support.
PNG
media_image1.png
506
726
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Referring to claim 3: George et al. as modified teaches the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of claim 1, wherein: each of the plurality of fingers (286 Fig. 17B) comprises a dedicated actuator (“Each spacer 284 and each clamp 286 are independently activated by linear actuators 283 and 285, respectively.” Col. 7, lines 40-43).
Referring to claim 5: George et al. as modified teaches the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of claim 1, wherein: the actuator comprises one or both of a pivoting actuator and a linear actuator (“Each spacer 284 and each clamp 286 are independently activated by linear actuators 283 and 285, respectively.” Col. 7, lines 42-43).
Referring to claim 18: George et al. as modified teaches a method of loading a semiconductor substrate into a substrate carrier frame (24 Fig. 17A; “FIG. 17A is a top perspective view of the wafer carrier fixture;” Col. 4, lines 35-36), comprising: positioning a substrate within a central aperture (central aperture of 280 shown in Fig. 17A) defined through a thickness (thickness of 280 shown in Figs. 17A and 17B) of a frame body (280 Figs. 17A and 17B) of the substrate carrier frame, wherein: the frame body (280 Figs. 17A and 17B) forms entire periphery (entire periphery of 280 shown in Fig. 17A) of the central aperture; and
an inner surface (inner surface of 280 shown in Fig. 17A) of the frame body facing the central aperture (central aperture of 280 shown in Fig. 17A),
to move the one finger from an open position (“clamp is clamped down to lock the position of the two wafers” Col. 7, lines 40-41) to a substrate receiving position; and engaging an edge of the substrate with a plurality of substrate receiving interfaces (SRI substrate receiving interface which makes physical contact with substrate shown in Fig. 1-A inserted above), wherein each of the plurality of substrate receiving interfaces (SRI Fig. 1-A inserted above) is disposed on a respective one of the plurality of fingers (plurality of 286 Fig. 17B).
But is silent on each of the plurality of fingers specifically extend from an inner surface of the frame body.
KOBAYASHI in an analogous semiconductor substrate carrier frame (1 Figs. 2 and 6) and teaches wherein each of the similar configuration plurality of fingers (42 Figs. 2 and 6) specifically extend from an inner surface (inner surface of 15/16 which accommodates 42 shown in Fig. 2) of the similar configuration frame body (15 and 16 Figs. 2 and 6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the substrate carrier frame of George et al. with the finger placement as taught by KOBAYASHI for the purpose of having an alternate configuration which houses the moving parts for general protection while giving them ample support.
Claims 2, 4, 6, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over George et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,948,034 B2) and KOBAYASHI (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0318954 A1), as applied above in claims 1 and 18, and in further view of Reimer et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,153,088 B2).
Referring to claim 2: George et al. as modified teaches the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of claim 1, wherein: the plurality of fingers (286 Fig. 17B) comprise three fingers (three fingers shown in Fig. 17B); but is silent on two of the fingers are fixed in position; and one of the fingers comprises the actuator.
Reimer et al. in an analogous semiconductor substrate carrier frame (120 Figs. 1-3) wherein: two of the fingers (318B Fig. 3) are fixed in position (“stationary seats 318B” Col. 6, line 40); and one of the fingers (318A Fig. 3) comprises the actuator (“actuator 308” Col. 6, lines 33-42).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of George et al. as modified with the fixed finger as taught by Reimer et al. for the purpose of, as it is known in the art, to have an alternate form of securing substrate.
Referring to claim 4: George et al. as modified teaches the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of claim 1, uses a robotic arm (“A transport device 480, such as a transport arm or slide, that is automated or otherwise manually operated, is used to move the carrier fixture 24, into and out of the chamber 12” Col. 7, lines 28-30).
But is silent on wherein: movement of the actuator between the substrate holding position and the open position is controlled via a robotic arm.
Reimer et al. in an analogous semiconductor substrate carrier frame (120 Figs. 1-3) teaches wherein: movement of the similar configuration actuator (“actuator 308” Col. 6, lines 33-42) between the substrate holding position (when 124 is gripped Col. 6, lines 41-42) and the open position (when 124 is not gripped Col. 6, lines 41-42) is controlled via a similar configuration robotic arm (202, 210, 212 Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of George et al. as modified with the robotic arm capabilities as taught by Reimer et al. for the purpose of, as it is known in the art, increasing the efficiency of the operation by automating the process.
Referring to claim 6: George et al. as modified teaches the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of claim 1, but is silent on wherein: the frame body comprises four straight sides that are connected with one another via rounded corners interposed therebetween.
Lee et al. in an analogous semiconductor substrate carrier frame body (200 Fig. 1) teaches four straight sides (sides of 202 shown Fig. 1) that are connected with one another via rounded corners (rounded corners show connecting sides of 202 shown Fig. 1) interposed therebetween.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the carrier frame body of George et al. as modified with the four straight sides and rounded corners interposed therebetween as taught by Lee et al. for the purpose of having a shaped frame which fits and is meant to be carried/ received in a similar shaped body.
Referring to claim 7: George et al. as modified teaches the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of claim 6, but is silent on wherein: a thickness of the frame at each of the straight sides is between 0.025 inches and 0.1 inches.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the thickness of the frame at each of the straight sides is between about 0.025 inches and 0.1 inches, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. See MPEP 2144.05.II. The Examiner notes that a particular parameter must be recognized as a result effective variable, in this case, that parameter is thickness of the frame at each of the straight sides is between about 0.025 inches and 0.1 inches which achieves the recognized result of supporting/ carrying the substrate, therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art at the filing date of the invention would have found the claimed range through routine experimentation. In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977). See also In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claims 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over George et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,948,034 B2), KOBAYASHI (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0318954 A1), and Reimer et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,153,088 B2).
Referring to claim 9: George et al. teaches a semiconductor substrate carrier frame (24 Fig. 17A; “FIG. 17A is a top perspective view of the wafer carrier fixture;” Col. 4, lines 35-36), comprising: a frame body (280 Figs. 17A and 17B) defining a central aperture (central aperture of 280 shown in Fig. 17A) through a thickness (thickness of 280 shown in Figs. 17A and 17B) of the frame body (280 Figs. 17A and 17B), wherein: the frame body (280 Figs. 17A and 17B) forms an entire periphery (entire periphery of 280 shown in Fig. 17A) of the central aperture, an inner surface (inner surface of 280 shown in Fig. 17A) of the frame body facing the central aperture (central aperture of 280 shown in Fig. 17A);
and at least one adjustable finger (286 Fig. 17B), each adjustable finger comprising an actuator (“Each spacer 284 and each clamp 286 are independently activated by linear actuators 283 and 285, respectively.” Col. 7, lines 40-43) that manipulates the respective adjustable finger between a substrate holding position and an open position (“clamp is clamped down to lock the position of the two wafers” Col. 7, lines 40-41), wherein each adjustable finger (286 Fig. 17B) comprises a substrate receiving interface (SRI substrate receiving interface which makes physical contact with substrate shown in Fig. 1-A inserted above).
But is silent on at least two fixed fingers that are coupled with the frame body, each of the fixed fingers extending from an inner surface of the frame body toward a center of the central aperture by a fixed distance; and specifically wherein each fixed finger comprises a substrate receiving interface.
Reimer et al. in an analogous semiconductor substrate carrier frame (120 Figs. 1-3) teaches at least two fixed fingers (318B Fig. 3) that are coupled with the similar configuration frame body (208 Fig. 3), each of the fixed fingers extending (shown extending in Fig. 3) from the similar configuration frame body (208 Fig. 3) toward a center of the similar configuration central aperture (334 Fig. 3) by a fixed distance (shown in Fig. 3); and specifically wherein each fixed finger (318B Fig. 3) comprises a substrate receiving interface (interface of 318B Fig. 3 which receives 124 Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of George et al. with the fixed fingers as taught by Reimer et al. for the purpose of, as it is known in the art, to have an alternate form of securing substrate.
KOBAYASHI in an analogous semiconductor substrate carrier frame (1 Figs. 2 and 6) and teaches wherein each of the similar configuration at least two of the fingers (42 Figs. 2 and 6) specifically extend from an inner surface (inner surface of 15/16 which accommodates 42 shown in Fig. 2) of the similar configuration frame body (15 and 16 Figs. 2 and 6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the substrate carrier frame of George et al. with the finger placement as taught by KOBAYASHI for the purpose of having an alternate configuration which houses the parts for general protection while giving them ample support.
Referring to claim 10: George et al. as modified teaches the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of claim 9, wherein: each actuator (“Each spacer 284 and each clamp 286 are independently activated by linear actuators 283 and 285, respectively.” Col. 7, lines 40-43 of George et al.) comprises one or more actuators selected from a group consisting of spring pin, a screw actuator, a pneumatic plungers system (Claim 6 of George et al.), a hydraulic plunger system (Claim 8 of George et al.), and a solenoid.
Referring to claim 11: George et al. as modified teaches the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of claim 9, but is silent on wherein: an actuation distance of each actuator is limited such that the substrate receiving interface of the respective adjustable finger does not extend beyond the substrate holding position when the actuator is fully extended.
Reimer et al. in an analogous semiconductor substrate carrier frame (120 Figs. 1-3) teaches wherein: an actuation distance (actuation distance of “actuator 308” Col. 6, lines 33-42) of each actuator is limited such that the substrate receiving interface of a respective adjustable finger (318A Fig. 3) does not extend beyond the substrate holding position (when 124 is gripped Col. 6, lines 41-42) when the actuator is fully extended (shown in Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of George et al. with the actuation distance as taught by Reimer et al. for the purpose of, as it is known in the art, having the proper constraints needed to prevent damage to the holder and/or the substrate to be processed.
Referring to claim 12: George et al. as modified teaches the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of claim 9, but is silent on wherein: the frame body comprises one or more grasping regions; and each fixed finger and each adjustable finger is offset from the one or more grasping regions.
Reimer et al. in an analogous semiconductor substrate carrier frame (120 Figs. 1-3) teaches wherein the frame body (208 Fig. 3) comprises one or more grasping regions (grasping regions of 308, 328, and 330 Fig. 3); and each fixed finger (318B Fig. 3) and each adjustable finger (318A Fig. 3) is offset (shown offset in Fig. 3) from the one or more grasping regions (grasping regions of 308, 328, and 330 Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of George et al. with the grasping regions and offset as taught by Reimer et al. for the purpose of, as it is known in the art, having adequate regions for grasping and securing the substrate to prevent unintentional slippage of the substrate to be processed.
Referring to claim 13: George et al. as modified teaches the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of claim 9, but is silent on wherein: when each of the at least one adjustable finger is in the substrate holding position, the substrate receiving interface of each adjustable finger and each fixed finger is at a same radial distance from a center of the frame body.
Reimer et al. in an analogous semiconductor substrate carrier frame (120 Figs. 1-3) teaches when each of the at least one adjustable finger (318A Fig. 3) is in the substrate holding position (when 124 is gripped Col. 6, lines 41-42), the substrate receiving interface (interface of 318A, 318B Fig. 3 which receives 124 Fig. 3) of each adjustable finger and each fixed finger is at a same radial distance from a center (“thereby centering the substrate on the end effector 208 and disk 304” Col. 6, lines 27-32) of the frame body (208 Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of George et al. as modified with the same radial distance from a center of the frame body as taught by Reimer et al. for the purpose of, as it is known in the art, having the substrate fit uniformly in the carrier where the holding features exert the same and equal amount of force.
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over George et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,948,034 B2) and KOBAYASHI (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0318954 A1), as applied above in claim 18, and in further view of Reimer et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,153,088 B2).
Referring to claim 19: George et al. as modified teaches the method of loading the semiconductor substrate into the substrate carrier frame of claim 18, but is silent on wherein: manipulating at least one actuator coupled with one finger of the plurality of fingers comprises using a robotic arm to move the at least one actuator between the open position and the substrate receiving position.
Reimer et al. in an analogous semiconductor substrate carrier frame (120 Figs. 1-3) teaches wherein: manipulating at least one actuator (“actuator 308” Col. 6, lines 33-42) coupled with one finger of a plurality of fingers (318A, 318B Fig. 3) comprises using a robotic arm (202, 210, 212 Fig. 3) to move the at least one actuator (“actuator 308” Col. 6, lines 33-42) between the open position (open position when 124 is not gripped Col. 6, lines 41-42) and the substrate receiving position (substrate receiving position when 124 is gripped Col. 6, lines 41-42).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of George et al. with the robotic arm and its movement as taught by Reimer et al. for the purpose of, as it is known in the art, using a robotic automation to increase the efficiency of the operation.
Referring to claim 20: George et al. as modified teaches the method of loading the semiconductor substrate into the substrate carrier frame of claim 18, wherein: positioning the substrate within the central aperture (central aperture of 280 shown in Fig. 17A of George et al.) comprises: chucking the substrate to a chucking surface (chucking surface inside 12 “The access port 14 is sized to allow placement and removal of a carrier fixture 24 into the chamber 12, shown in FIG. 9. In some embodiments, a pre-load chamber 15 communicates with chamber 12 through port 14, as shown in FIG. 7. Port 14 has a door (not shown) for closing the port if desired. For loading the wafer stack into the evacuated chamber 12, first the port door is closed and the carrier fixture 24 with the pre-aligned wafers 410, 420 is placed in the pre-load chamber 15” Col. 7, lines 11-19 of George et al.); and positioning the frame body (280 Figs. 17A and 17B of George et al.) about the chucked substrate (“the pre-load chamber 15 is evacuated and then the port door is opened and the carrier fixture 24 with the bonded wafers 410, 420 are removed from the chamber 12 and the port door is closed again.” Col. 7, lines 23-27 of George et al.) such that the chucked substrate is disposed within the central aperture (central aperture of 280 shown in Fig. 17A of George et al.).
Claim 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over George et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,948,034 B2) and KOBAYASHI (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0318954 A1), as applied above in claim 1, and in further view of Nishida (U.S. Patent No. 11,396,082 B2).
Referring to claim 8: George et al. as modified teaches the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of claim 1, but is silent on wherein: in the open position, the substrate receiving interface of the respective finger is brought closer to the frame body and further from the center of the central aperture, and in the substrate holding position, the substrate receiving interface is positioned further from the frame body and closer to the center of the central aperture.
Nishida in an analogous semiconductor substrate carrier frame (405 Figs. 2, 6A, and 6B) teaches wherein: in the open position (402 in open position shown in Fig. 6A), the similar configuration substrate receiving interface (substrate receiving interface of 402a shown in Figs. 6A and 6B) of the respective similar configuration finger (402 Figs. 6A and 6B) is brought closer to the similar configuration frame body (404 Figs. 2, 6A, and 6B) and further from the center of the similar configuration central aperture (center of the central aperture of 404 shown in Fig. 2), and in the similar configuration substrate holding position (402a in the substrate holding position shown in Fig. 6B), the similar configuration substrate receiving interface (interface of 318A Fig. 3 which receives 124 Fig. 3) is positioned further from the similar configuration frame body (404 Figs. 2, 6A, and 6B) and closer to the center of the similar configuration central aperture (shown further from the frame body and closer to the center of the central aperture in Fig. 6B).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify to modify the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of George et al. as modified with the finger configuration as taught by Nishida for the purpose of, as it is known in the art, having an alternate configuration of fingers which are capable of securing/ holding the substrate.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over George et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,948,034 B2), Reimer et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,153,088 B2), and KOBAYASHI (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0318954 A1), as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Randhawa et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9,275,849 B2).
Referring to claim 14: George et al. as modified teaches the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of claim 9, wherein: the at least two fixed fingers and the at least one adjustable finger are arranged at intervals about the central aperture. But is silent on the intervals being specifically equal.
Randhawa et al. teaches a similar configuration semiconductor substrate carrier frame (10 Fig. 3) wherein the similar configuration fingers (31, 33, and 34 Fig. 2) are spaced at equal intervals (“circumferentially spaced from each other at equal distances” Col. 7, lines 10-13).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of George et al. as modified with the equally spaced fingers as taught by Randhawa et al. for the purpose of, as it is known in the art, having an alternate configuration which even holds the substrate, and since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C)
Claims 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over George et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,948,034 B2), Reimer et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,153,088 B2), and KOBAYASHI (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0318954 A1), as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Havassy (U.S. Patent No. 4,570,058 A).
Referring to claim 15: George et al. as modified teaches the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of claim 9, but is silent on wherein: each substrate receiving interface comprises a roller.
Havassy in an analogous semiconductor substrate carrier frame (Fig. 1-3), wherein: each similar configuration substrate receiving interface (substrate receiving interface which supports the wafer in 28, 29, and 33 Figs. 1-3) comprises a roller (28, 29, and 33 Figs. 1-3; Col. 2, lines 50-51).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the substrate receiving interface of George et al. as modified with the roller as taught by Havassy for the purpose of, as it is known in the art, having alternate configuration for supporting/ holder the substrate.
Referring to claim 16: George et al. as modified teaches the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of claim 9, but is silent on wherein: each substrate receiving interface comprises a cylindrical body defining a groove; and a width of the groove corresponds to a thickness of the substrate being secured by the substrate receiving interface.
Havassy in an analogous semiconductor substrate carrier frame (Fig. 1-3), wherein: each substrate receiving interface (substrate receiving interface which supports the wafer in 28, 29, and 33 Figs. 1-3) comprises a cylindrical body (cylindrical body of 28, 29, and 33 Figs. 1-3; Col. 2, lines 50-51) defining a groove (“V-grooved” Col. 2, lines 50-51); and a width (width shown in Fig. 3; “adapted to support a wafer on its edge” Col. 2, lines 50-51) of the groove corresponds to a thickness (thickness of the substrate shown in Fig. 3) of the substrate being secured by the substrate receiving interface (substrate receiving interface which supports the wafer in 28, 29, and 33 Figs. 1-3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the substrate receiving interface of George et al. as modified with the grooved cylindrical body as taught by Havassy for the purpose of, as it is known in the art, having alternate configuration for supporting/ holder the substrate.
Referring to claim 17: George et al. as modified teaches the semiconductor substrate carrier frame of claim 16, wherein: the groove (“V-grooved” Col. 2, lines 50-51 of Havassy) comprises walls that taper inward (shown in Fig. 3 of Havassy) toward a center of the cylindrical body (center of the cylindrical body of 28, 29, and 33 shown in Fig. 3).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER SOTO whose telephone number is (571)272-8172. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8a.m. - 5 p.m..
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, Monica Carter can be reached at 571-272-4475. 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 SOTO
Examiner
Art Unit 3723
/CHRISTOPHER SOTO/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/MONICA S CARTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723