Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/103,684

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SEMICONDUCTOR WAFER TRANSPORT

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jan 31, 2023
Examiner
COLLINS, MICHAEL
Art Unit
3655
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
829 granted / 1167 resolved
+19.0% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+22.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
1192
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
37.3%
-2.7% vs TC avg
§102
35.9%
-4.1% vs TC avg
§112
16.8%
-23.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1167 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-10, in the reply filed on 12/17/2025 is acknowledged. Claim Objections Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: the status identifier is incorrect because applicant elected Group I which includes claim 10. Claim 10 is not considered as withdrawn for the purposes of this examination. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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)(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(s) 1, 9, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by OSHIMA et al. (USPGPUB 2023/0095452). Regarding claim 1, OSHIMA et al. disclose a device, comprising: a movable blade (24) configured to receive a semiconductor wafer (W); and a positional sensor (see “cameras” in paragraphs [0069] and [0071]) configured to detect a position (see “the teaching position” in paragraph [0074]) of the semiconductor wafer on a surface (243-246) of the movable blade (24), relative to a stationary body (11-14 or 31-34); wherein the movable blade (24) is further configured to move with respect to the stationary body to cause a displacement of the semiconductor wafer relative to the movable blade (see Figures 1-2 and paragraphs [0069]-[0071]); and the positional sensor is physically coupled to the movable blade (see paragraphs [0069] and [0071]). Regarding claim 9, OSHIMA et al. disclose the device of claim 1, wherein: the positional sensor comprises an image sensor (see “cameras” in paragraphs [0069] and [0071]), coupled to the movable blade, to generate positional image data for: the semiconductor wafer adhered to the movable blade; or a chamber (243-246) associated with the semiconductor wafer; a memory device (100) to store the positional image data; and one or more processors (100), configured to: compare the positional image data to a threshold to determine whether the position of the semiconductor wafer is within a position range (see paragraphs [0074]-[0078]); and adjust the position of the semiconductor wafer, based on the determination of whether the position of the semiconductor wafer is within the position range (see paragraphs [0074]-[0078]). Regarding claim 10, OSHIMA et al. disclose the device of claim 9, further comprising: a machine learning model to ingest: the positional image data for a plurality of semiconductor wafers (see paragraphs [0074]-[0078]); and yield data for the plurality of semiconductor wafers (see paragraphs [0074]-[0078]); wherein the machine learning model is configured to determine an association between the positional image data and the yield data for the plurality of semiconductor wafers (see paragraphs [0074]-[0078]); and wherein the threshold is adjusted, based on the determined association (see paragraphs [0074]-[0078]). 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. The factual inquiries 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(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miu et al. (USPGPUB 2014/0277727) and further in view of OSHIMA et al. (USPGPUB 2023/0095452). Regarding claim 1, Miu et al. disclose a device, comprising: a movable blade (300) configured to receive a semiconductor wafer (see paragraph [0023]); and a positional sensor (see paragraphs [0023]) configured to detect the semiconductor wafer on a surface of the movable blade (300); wherein the movable blade (300) is further configured to move with respect to the stationary body to cause a displacement of the semiconductor wafer relative to the movable blade (see paragraph [0020]); and the positional sensor is physically coupled to the movable blade (see paragraph [0023]). However, they do not disclose a positional sensor configured to detect a position of the semiconductor wafer on a surface of the movable blade, relative to a stationary body. OSHIMA et al. disclose a device, comprising: a positional sensor (see “cameras” in paragraphs [0069] and [0071]) configured to detect a position (see “the teaching position” in paragraph [0074]) of the semiconductor wafer on a surface (243-246) of the movable blade (24), relative to a stationary body (11-14 or 31-34). Therefore, 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 device disclosed by Miu et al. by including a positional sensor configured to detect a position of the semiconductor wafer on a surface of the movable blade, relative to a stationary body, as disclosed by OSHIMA et al., with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of providing wafer-shaped inspection devices having cameras (see paragraph [0069]). Regarding claim 2, Miu et al. disclose the device of claim 1, wherein: the device comprises a vacuum interface to adhere the semiconductor wafer to the movable blade (see paragraph [0023]); a vacuum of the vacuum interface is selectively disengageable (see paragraph [0035]); and the vacuum interface is configured to disengage the vacuum interface prior to the displacement of the semiconductor wafer relative to the movable blade, and thereupon engage the vacuum interface prior to a coupled movement of the semiconductor wafer and the movable blade (see paragraph [0023]). Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OSHIMA et al. (USPGPUB 2023/0095452) as applied to claims 1, 9, and 10 above, and further in view of MALIK et al. (USPGPUB 2021/0225687). Regarding claim 3, OSHIMA et al. disclose the device of claim 1. However, they do not disclose a device further comprising: a contact sensor coupled to the movable blade to determine a temperature of the semiconductor wafer adhered thereto. MALIK et al. disclose a device further comprising: a contact sensor coupled to the movable blade to determine a temperature of the semiconductor wafer adhered thereto (see paragraph [0062]). Therefore, 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 device disclosed by OSHIMA et al. by including a device further comprising: a contact sensor coupled to the movable blade to determine a temperature of the semiconductor wafer adhered thereto, as disclosed by MALIK et al., with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of providing a sensor on the blade that can monitor the temperature of the substrate (see paragraph [0062]). Regarding claim 4, OSHIMA et al. disclose the device of claim 1. However, they do not disclose a device further comprising: a non-contact sensor coupled to the movable blade to determine a temperature of the semiconductor wafer adhered thereto. MALIK et al. disclose a device further comprising: a non-contact sensor coupled to the movable blade to determine a temperature of the semiconductor wafer adhered thereto (see “any part” along with the rest of paragraph [0062]). Therefore, 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 device disclosed by OSHIMA et al. by including a device further comprising: a non-contact sensor coupled to the movable blade to determine a temperature of the semiconductor wafer adhered thereto, as disclosed by MALIK et al., with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of providing a sensor on the blade that can monitor the temperature of the substrate (see paragraph [0062]). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5-8 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: dependent claim 5 discloses, “a plurality of temperature sensors to determine a temperature of a plurality of zones of the semiconductor wafer, the plurality of zones being concentrically spaced from one another” which, in combination with the rest of the claim language of claims 1 and 5, teaches an apparatus that is novel over the prior art of record. Dependent claim 6 discloses, “a second sensor to detect a gap between the semiconductor wafer and an additional semiconductor wafer” which, in combination with the rest of the claim language of claims 1, 2, and 6, teaches an apparatus that is novel over the prior art of record. Dependent claim 7 discloses, “adjust a temperature of the temperature controlled chamber, based on the determination of whether the temperature data is within the temperature range” which, in combination with the rest of the claim language of claims 1 and 7, teaches an apparatus that is novel over the prior art of record. Claims 21-24 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: independent claim 21 discloses, “a plurality of temperature sensors to determine temperatures of a plurality of zones of the semiconductor wafer” which, in combination with the rest of the claim language, teaches an apparatus that is novel over the prior art of record. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL COLLINS whose telephone number is (571)272-8970. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday. 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, Jacob Scott can be reached at (571) 270-3415. 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. M.K.C. 1/7/2026 /MICHAEL COLLINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 31, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 01, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589464
PUSHER, TRANSFER DEVICE, AND SUBSTRATE PROCESSING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592134
Systems And Methods For Tool Activation And Display Cabinet Locking
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583688
ARTICLE CONVEYANCE SORTING APPARATUS, ARTICLE SORTING SYSTEM, AND CONTROL SERVER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583678
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR REPLACING POWER SUPPLY DEVICE IN A UAV
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578697
Conveyor System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
71%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+22.4%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1167 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month