DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
2. Applicant’s response dated 30 March 2026 has been entered into the record and is considered fully responsive. The applicant amended Claim 1 and Claim 13. Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 are currently pending and under examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gleissner et al.
Gleissner et al. (US Pub. No. 2017/0125281 A1) is directed toward an apparatus for treating surfaces of wafer-like articles (title).
Regarding Claim 1, Gleissner et al. discloses a substrate holder (analogous to the annular chuck 220 for gripping a wafer in ¶36, 40, 44, 47, 49-50) that includes a support surface for supporting a substrate and positions the substrate such that a center axis of the substrate (element W in ¶49-53) is located on an ideal axis extending in a direction perpendicularly intersecting the support surface (¶10, 20, 23, 49, and 51) and further depicted in FIG. 1A and FIG. 2A. Gleissner et al. further describes the substrate holder comprises: a first holding member (analogous to the chuck plate), a second holding member (analogous to the gripping pins) adapted to pinch the substrate with the first holding member as depicted in FIG. 1A. Also, Gleissner et al. teaches the three or more positioning members including contact surfaces that come into contact with side end portions of the substrate which is analogous to the series of gripping pins described in the abstract and depicted as element 226 in Fig. 2A (¶7-10, 14-17, 20-26, 41-43, and 49-52). Gleissner teaches a first moving member (analogous to the drive ring 230) including a plurality of engaging portions that are engaged with the positioning members such that the positioning members (i.e.: the gripping pins 226) are moved at the same time with a state in which distances between the ideal axis and the contact surfaces of the positioning members are equal to each other maintained; and a first biasing member (analogous to the helical spring 240) adapted to bias the first moving member (analogous to the drive ring 230) wherein the first moving member (analogous to the drive ring 230) delivers a biasing force of the first biasing member (analogous to the helical spring 240) to each of the positioning members (analogous to gripping pins 226) via the engaging portions, and each of the positioning members (analogous to gripping pins 226) is biased in a direction in which the contact surfaces approach the ideal axis with the biasing force delivered from the first biasing member as depicted in FIG. 2A (and explained in ¶40).
Pertaining to amended Claim 1, Gleissner et al. discloses an embodiment in ¶44 that describes the drive spring (230) as being formed by two separate segments. The use of this design would lower the strain compared to a single drive spring. Additionally a drive spring separated into two segments would necessarily be arc shaped (i.e.: not a full circle) and necessarily only cover a portion of the circumference of the ideal axis as required by the amendment to Claim 1. Therefore, Gleissner et al. does in fact anticipate the amendment to Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 2, Gleissner et al. discloses the substrate holder according to Claim 1, wherein the positioning members (analogous to the gripping pins 226) include engaged portions with which the engaging portions are movably engaged, the first moving member (analogous to the drive ring 230) is configured to be rotatable about the ideal axis, and when the first moving member (analogous to the drive ring 230) rotates about the ideal axis, rotation of the first moving member (analogous to the drive ring 230) is delivered to the positioning members (analogous to the gripping pins 226) via the engaging portions and engaged portions, and the positioning members move in a radial direction of a virtual circle around the ideal axis as depicted in FIG. 2A (¶41).
Regarding Claim 3, Gleissner et al. discloses the substrate holder according to Claim 2, wherein the engaged portions are first long holes (analogous to slots 232), and the engaging portions are second long holes (analogous to slots 232) to establish engagement with the first pins or second pins (analogous to gripping pins 226) to establish engagement with the first long holes as depicted in FIG. 2A, FIG. 2B, and FIG. 2C.
Regarding Claim 4, Gleissner et al. discloses the substrate holder according to Claim 3, wherein the first pins and the second pins (i.e.: gripping pins) extend in parallel with the ideal axis, and a longitudinal direction of the first long holes (i.e.: slots 232) and a longitudinal direction of the second long holes (i.e.: slots 232) are directions that intersect the radial direction and a circumferential direction of the virtual circle as depicted in FIG.2A, FIG. 2B, and FIG. 2C.
Regarding Claim 5, Gleissner et al. discloses the substrate holder according to Claim 2, further comprising: a second moving member adapted to cause the first moving member to rotate about the ideal axis as indicated in ¶24-26 with respect to the drive ring with series of cam surfaces).
Regarding Claim 6, Gleissner et al. discloses the substrate holder according to Claim 5, wherein the second moving member includes a first pressurizing surface and is configured to be rotatable about the ideal axis, the first moving member includes a first pressurized surface, and the first biasing member is located between the first pressurized surface of the first moving member and the first pressurizing surface of the second moving member and biases the first moving member via the first pressurized surface as ¶43-44 explains how the wafer is held encapsulated in the chuck body (i.e.: using pressurized surfaces) (see FIG. 2A, FIG. 2B, and FIG. 2C).
Regarding Claim 7, Gleissner et al. discloses the substrate holder according to Claim 5, wherein the second moving member includes a second pressurizing surface and is configured to be rotatable about the ideal axis, the first moving member includes a second pressurized surface facing the second pressurizing surface, the first moving member is biased in a direction in which the second pressurized surface approaches the second pressurizing surface, and the second pressurized surface abuts the second pressurizing surface, by the first biasing member biasing the first moving member, and when the second moving member rotates about the ideal axis, the second pressurized surface rotates along with the second pressurizing surface, and the first moving member rotates in the same rotation direction as a rotation direction of the second moving member as ¶43-44 explains how the wafer is held encapsulated in the chuck body (i.e.: using pressurized surfaces) (see FIG. 2A, FIG. 2B, and FIG. 2C).
Regarding Claim 10, Gleissner et al. discloses the substrate holder according to Claim 5, wherein the positioning members, the first biasing member, and the second moving member are provided in the first holding member, the second holding member includes an abutting member, the second moving member includes an abutted member that is to abut the abutting member of the second holding member, and when the first holding member and the second holding member pinch the substrate, the abutting member of the second holding member causes the second moving member to rotate about the ideal axis by the abutting member abutting the abutted member of the second moving member and by the abutting member pressurizing the abutted member as explained in ¶40 to ¶52 and depicted in FIG. 2A and FIG. 2B.
Regarding Claim 11, Gleissner et al. discloses the substrate holder according to Claim 10, wherein the abutting member is a protrusion fixed to the second holding member, the abutted member includes an inclined surface that is inclined relative to a plane perpendicularly intersecting the ideal axis, when the first holding member and the second holding member pinch the substrate, the protrusion abuts the inclined surface and pressurizes the inclined surface in a direction in which the ideal axis extends, and the second moving member is configured to rotate in a second rotation direction that is a rotation direction opposite to the first rotation direction with a force that the inclined surface receives from the protrusion as indicated in ¶40 to ¶52 and depicted in FIG. 2A and FIG. 2B.
Regarding Claim 12, Gleissner et al. discloses the substrate holder according to Claim 10, wherein the second holding member includes a substrate sealing member adapted to establish sealing between the second holding member and the substrate, and rotation of the second moving member caused by the abutting member when the first holding member and the second holding member pinch the substrate is performed prior to contact between the substrate sealing member and the substrate as explained in ¶38 where the top plate is described as sealing the substrate upon closing the chamber.
Regarding amended Claim 13, Gleissner et al. discloses the substrate holder according to Claim 1, wherein the first moving includes a pair of side surfaces extending in the circumferential direction of a virtual circle around the ideal axis. The substrate holder of Claim 13 further included a guide member adapted to come into contact with each of the side surfaces and guide the first moving member in the circumferential direction of the virtual circle around the ideal axis as depicted FIG. 1A and FIG. 2A.
Regarding Claim 14, Gleissner et al. discloses the substrate holder according to Claim 1, wherein the positioning members are configured to be movable from a first position at which the distances between the ideal axis and the contact surfaces are longer than a radius of the substrate to a second position at which the distances between the ideal axis and the contact surfaces are shorter than the radius of the substrate as explained in the abstract ¶7, 9, 14-15, 17-18, 20, 22, 24, and 26 where the first and second positions of the gripping pins are described as well as the diameters (D1 and D2). The diameters of Gleissner et al. are analogous to the radius of the instant application of Claim 14.
5. Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gleissner et al. as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Lee.
Gleissner et al. (US Pub. No. 2017/0125281 A1) is directed toward an apparatus for treating surfaces of wafer-like articles (title). Lee (US Pub. No. 2009/0090467 A1) is directed toward a spin head for supporting and rotating a substrate (abstract).
Regarding Claim 8, Gleissner et al. discloses the substrate holder according to Claim 1, but does not teach a second biasing member. Lee is directed toward a spin head for supporting and rotating a substrate (abstract) so it is analogous art to Gleissner et al.
Lee discloses a second biasing member adapted to cause the first moving member to rotate in a first direction around the ideal axis, wherein when the first moving member rotates in the first rotation direction, the contact surfaces move in a direction away from the ideal axis in conjunction with rotation of the first moving member as depicted in FIG. 10A, FIG. 13A, and FIG. 13B and explained in ¶75-81. Lee clearly discloses multiple biasing members as depicted in Fig. 9.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the substrate holder of Gleissner et al. by incorporating multiple biasing members as taught in Lee with the reasonable expectation of having greater control over the action of the pins that hold the substrate with the increase in the number of biasing members.
Regarding Claim 9, Gleissner et al. in view of Lee discloses the substrate holder of Claim 8, wherein the second biasing member biases the second moving member in a direction that intersects a radial direction of a virtual circle around the ideal axis and causes the second moving member to rotate in the first rotation direction member as depicted in FIG. 10A, FIG. 13A, and FIG. 13B and explained in ¶75-81.
Response to Arguments
6. Applicant’s arguments, see pg. 11-12, filed 30 March 2026, with respect to the rejections of Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 under 35 USC 102 have been fully considered, but are not persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been maintained. The applicant has argued that Gleissner et al. does not teach the an arc-shaped member which only covers a portion of the circumference around the ideal axis. The covering a portion of the circumference is a new claim amendment, so it was not previously considered. However, the examiner finds that Gleissner et al. does in fact teach the new limitation as explained in the updated rejection for Claim 1 above as per the embodiment in ¶44 where the drive spring is spilt into 2 segments. Additionally, the examiner finds that as the chuck is rotated during the plating process, the configuration of the pins would hold the wafer in place due to the centrifugal force despite the applicant’s argument to the contrary in their response.
Conclusion
7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Priddy et al. (US Pub. No. 2012/0263569 A1) is directed toward substrate holders and methods of substrate mounting (title).
8. 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.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN SYLVESTER whose telephone number is (703)756-5536. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:15 AM to 4:30 PM EST.
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, James Lin can be reached at (571)272-8902. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
10. 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.
/KEVIN SYLVESTER/Examiner, Art Unit 1794
/JAMES LIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1794
