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 .
Response to Amendments
Receipt of Applicant’s Amendment, filed on 4 November 2025 is acknowledged and entered.
Election of Species 5, corresponding to Claim 33, without traverse is acknowledged.
By this Amendment:
Applicant withdrew Claims 26-28, 30, 36-41, and 43-46.
Applicant amended Claims 25, 29, 31, 32, 34, 35 are 42. Of these claims, Claims 29, 31, 32, 34, 35 are 42 are also withdrawn by Applicant.
Therefore, Claims 26-32, and 34-46 stand as withdrawn by Applicant.
Applicant additionally canceled Claim 33 (and added its subject matter to Claim 25).
Applicant added Claim 47.
Therefore, Claims 25 and 47 remain pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 25 and 47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 25, the claim contains the following preamble: “A device for cleaning a pot-shaped hollow body (12), in particular transport containers for semiconductor wafers or for EUV lithography masks…”
Here, the phrase “in particular” renders the claim indefinite, as it is unknown if “transport containers for semiconductor wafers or for EUV lithography masks” are required for the claimed invention, or merely a suggestion of intended use.
Regarding Claim 47, the claim depends upon Claim 25, and therefore suffers the same deficiencies.
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 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.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kawano et al. (US 5,363,867).
Regarding Claim 25, Kawano et al. discloses a device for cleaning a pot-shaped hollow body, the hollow body comprising: the hollow body (Fig 15, container 40 as annotated by Examiner, which comprises container body 41, container cover 42, and additional components) comprising:
- a base wall (Fig 15, Examiner's annotations) and a side wall (Examiner's annotations) that forms an inner hollow body surface;
- an opening (Examiner's annotations, in Fig 15 the opening is shown as being filled by container cover 42) that is disposed opposite the base wall and that is proximate a marginal surface (Fig 15, flange 41B) of the side wall;
- a support wall (Fig 15, annular plate 61) on which the marginal surface (41B) of the hollow body can be placed (annular plate/storage table 61 is introduced at Col 13, lines 35-49);
- a locking device (Fig 7, cam 44, as initially described at Col 8, lines 36-50) by which the hollow body (40) is sealingly connectable to the marginal surface and releasably connectable to the support wall;
- a passage opening (Fig 15, port 62, see at least Col 14, line 1-13) and that is formed by the support wall and that is arranged radially inwardly from the locking device (Fig 15 shows port 62 as situated between flanges 41B; therefore port 62 is also “radially inward” from the locking device cam shown at Fig 7);
- a cleaning device (Fig 21, items 167, 168, and 170) by which a first cleaning fluid (from liquid supply 170) for cleaning the inner hollow body (40) surface can be dispensed when the hollow body is connected to the support wall (see at least Col 16, lines 31-37); and
- a first drainage channel (Col 16, lines 45-46 and Fig 21, "funnel-shaped liquid collector 171" having a first end,
- wherein the first end of the first drainage channel is only in fluid communication with the passage opening and by which the first cleaning fluid dispensed by the cleaning device can be drained (see Col 16, lines 45-46),
- wherein a first channel (61A) is arranged in the support wall (61) by which a flushing fluid (nitrogen) can be conducted to the marginal surface (Per Fig 15, nitrogen flows into port 62, which is in clear communication with marginal surface 41B). See Kawano et al.’s teachings at Col 14, lines 1-21).
PNG
media_image1.png
796
506
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
596
634
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
736
538
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 47 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawano et al., in view of Lee et al. (US 2016/0329219 A1).
Regarding Claim 47, Kawano et al. discloses a device for cleaning a pot-shaped hollow body, wherein the cleaning device has a first cleaning head (167) that projects over the passage opening (port 62) and the first cleaning head has a number of first cleaning nozzles (indicated by the multiple arrows in Fig 21) by which the first cleaning fluid can be dispensed at a spray angle (although Fig 21 shows a cleaning heads directed vertically, Examiner broadly recognizes an "angle" as including a 0 or 90 deg orientation).
Further regarding Claim 47, although the Kawano reference teaches a first cleaning head, the reference on generically describes this component, so is silent on the first cleaning head (having) a setting device by which the spray angle can be set.
Lee et al., however, teaches a first cleaning head (having) a setting device (Fig 4, "nozzle bar rotating mechanism 202a, 202b") by which the spray angle can be set (see at least paras 17, 34, 59, and 121-122).
PNG
media_image4.png
550
606
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The Kawano and Lee references each teach substrate (wafer) cleaning apparatuses. The Lee reference additionally teaches a rotational nozzle bar capable of directing cleaning fluid as required by the operator. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the are prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the generically described nozzle 167 of the Kawano reference with the more detailed, rotatable nozzle as taught by the Lee reference, in order to gain the advantages of accurately directing cleaning fluid as required by the operator.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
- US 5621982 A has the same assignee as the aforementioned Kawano et al. reference, and teaches many of the same features.
- US 7360346 B2 teaches a device for cleaning a pot-shaped hollow body, featuring a locking device (latch 5) by which the hollow body (3) is sealingly connectable to the marginal surface (14), but is silent on a first channel arranged in the support wall by which a flushing fluid can be conducted to the marginal surface, as claimed by Applicant.
- US 6135168 A teaches a “standard mechanical interface wafer pod gas filling system” featuring a hollow body, port, and locking mechanism as claimed by Applicant, but is silent on a (fluid) cleaning device and drainage channel, as claimed by Applicant.
- US 20020046760 A1 teaches a wafer cleaning apparatus with several embodiments that feature first and second drainage channels and a second cleaning head, as claimed by Applicant in the presently amended and withdrawn claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER M AFFUL whose telephone number is (571)272-8421. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday: 7:30 AM - 5:00 PM Eastern Time.
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, Craig Schneider can be reached at 5712723607. 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 M AFFUL/Examiner, Art Unit 3753