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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character not mentioned in the description: 3. As a note, to rectify this, “3” in FIG. 4 should likely be replaced with --1--.
The drawings are further objected to because there does not appear to be a difference between Figs. 5A and 5B. (See related Specification objection below.)
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: there are not separate descriptions of what is shown in FIG. 5A versus what is shown in FIG. 5B. Similarly, there are several references to “FIG. 5” yet there is no FIG. 5. (See related Drawing objection above.) Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 USC 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 USC 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 USC 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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-8 and 9 are rejected under 35 USC 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Thanu et al. (US 10,090,188 B2) (“Thanu”).
Referring to claims 1 and 9: Thanu teaches a substrate conveying robot comprising:
a substrate holding hand 208, 202, 210; and
an arm 204 to move the substrate holding hand (column 4, lines 11-20); wherein the substrate holding hand includes:
a frame 208;
a blade 202 to support a substrate (column 4, lines 36-46);
a mounting member 210 to support the blade and mount the blade to the frame (FIG. 2B); and
an inclination adjusting mechanism operable to adjust an inclination of the blade with respect to a horizontal direction in a side view by adjusting an inclination of the mounting member with respect to the frame (Figs. 2D-2F).
Referring to claim 2: Thanu teaches the inclination adjusting mechanism includes an inclination adjusting pin 218; and
the inclination adjusting pin is inserted into the mounting member, supports the mounting member such that the mounting member is rotatable about a predetermined rotation axis extending in a lateral direction perpendicular to a forward-rearward direction in which the frame and the blade are aligned in the horizontal direction, and extends in the lateral direction (Figs. 2B-2F).
Referring to claim 4: Thanu teaches the inclination adjusting pin is supported by the frame and protrudes from a [bottom] side of the frame so as to be inserted into the mounting member (FIG. 2B).
Referring to claim 6: Thanu teaches the blade includes a plurality of blades (FIG. 4) each to support the substrate;
the mounting member supports the plurality of blades in common; and
the inclination adjusting mechanism is operable to collectively adjust inclinations of the plurality of blades with respect to the horizontal direction in the side view by adjusting the inclination of the mounting member with respect to the frame (column 7, lines 37-65).
Referring to claim 7: Thanu teaches the plurality of blades are aligned at a predetermined pitch in a direction perpendicular to main surfaces of the blades; and
the inclination adjusting mechanism is operable to collectively adjust the inclinations of the plurality of blades with respect to the horizontal direction in the side view while maintaining the pitch between the plurality of blades in the direction perpendicular to the main surfaces of the blades (column 7, lines 37-65; FIG. 4).
Referring to claim 8: Thanu teaches the mounting member is laterally attached to a side surface of the frame (FIG. 2B).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 and 5 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. GOTO et al. (US 2018/0104827 A1) teaches a substrate conveying system comprising multiple blades 7, 8. Kobayashi et al. (US 6,216,883 B1) also teaches a wafer holding system comprising multiple blades (FIG. 3).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CATHERINE A LOIKITH whose telephone number is (571)270-7822. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5:30pm.
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, Doug Hutton can be reached at 571-272-4137. 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.
/Catherine Loikith/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674
16 April 2026
Prosecution Insights